Modest but uneven R&D increases proposed for FY 2013

Abstract

For the second straight year, President Obama has proposed increasing R&D expenditures despite an overall federal budget that remains frozen at its fiscal year 2011 level. But the $2 billion, 1.4% increase for R&D he is requesting for FY 2013 is considerably less bold than the $4.1 billion, 6.5% jump he had sought for FY 2012.“The president thinks that it’s absolutely critical to the nation’s future to make these investments in research and development and STEM education in order to have the sort of future that I think all Americans want,” presidential science adviser John Holdren said at the 13 February unveiling of the budget. “The president has consistently stuck to the message that whatever else we’ve got to do to live within our financial means, we’re not going to skimp on investments in these crucial domains.”As is the case each year, some federal agencies that fund R&D fare better than others. On the down side for the second year is the Department of Defense, whose massive R&D programs are trimmed by 4.4%, to $69.7 billion. As recently as FY 2010, the Pentagon had spent $80.6 billion for R&D.In percentage terms, the big winners for FY 2013 are NSF, which is slated for a 4.8% increase, to $7.4 billion, and the relatively tiny laboratory programs of NIST, which would move up 14.3%, to $648 million. And although the Department of Energy, the largest federal funder of basic research in the physical sciences, grows 3.2%, its high-energy physics, nuclear physics, and fusion-energy programs are squeezed. NASA is in store for another small reduction in funding, to $17.7 billion.In the unlikely event that Congress enacts Obama’s budget proposal largely intact during an election year, appropriations for R&D, as with all other discretionary federal spending, could still sink in January 2013 by as much as 8% from their proposed level. That’s when mandatory reductions, or sequestrations, are due to take effect in accordance with last year’s Budget Control Act. Unless Congress and the president agree to change the statute, discretionary outlays are to be cut by $109.3 billion per year beginning in FY 2013. Half of that, $54.7 billion, will come from the Defense Department and half from the remainder of the budget. The act does not further specify how the reductions will be applied, and neither the White House nor lawmakers have begun to address that looming crunch.Obama’s FY 2013 budget purports to keep R&D funding at three agencies—NIST, NSF, and DOE’s Office of Science—on a path to doubling in size, through “fiscally responsible increases.” With austerity now the watchword, however, the doubling period is being stretched out well beyond its originally envisioned 10 years. Holdren, who calls those three agencies’ portfolios “absolutely critical to contributing to fundamental research,” allowed that their growth “is not at the rate of increase we would have preferred.” At the 2.4% growth proposed for the Office of Science in FY 2013, doubling its current $4.9 billion budget would take about 30 years.The White House proposes a federal portfolio of basic and applied research totaling $64 billion—a $2 billion, 3.3% increase from the current year. The budget for the National Institutes of Health, by far the largest supporter of basic research, would stay exactly even with this year’s level of $30 billion. Holdren told reporters that he was “rather relieved that [NIH] didn’t go down because of the pressures on the budget.”The budget would allocate $3 billion in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education programs government-wide, an increase of 2.6% from the current year. Carl Wieman, the associate director for science at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, said the request reflects Obama’s call for the training of 100 000 new, effective STEM teachers and a 1 million, or 33.3%, increase in the number of well-prepared STEM college graduates over the next 10 years. A five-year strategic plan for STEM education, to be released by the White House in the spring, will propose ways to increase coordination and collaboration and to improve the efficiency and impact of the 235 STEM education programs currently operated by 13 different agencies, Wieman said. Through consolidation or elimination, the budget proposes to reduce that number by more than two dozen in FY 2013. NASA’s STEM education funding would be cut 21.3%, to $117 million, and NSF’s STEM programs would grow 3.4%, to $1.2 billion next year. The Department of Education would receive a 21.5% increase, to $628 million, for STEM education.NSF and the Department of Education are set to launch a joint $60 million evidence-based initiative to improve K–16 mathematics education. The program will support collaborations between education researchers and practitioners to develop and test promising approaches and support widespread adoption of practices found to be effective. The multiagency model will be expanded in the future to include other STEM programs and agencies as part of the strategic plan.The 2013 budget would provide $2.6 billion for the multiagency US Global Change Research Program, an increase of 5.6%. The interagency Networking and Information Technology R&D program would increase 1.8%, to $3.8 billion, and the National Nanotechnology Initiative would receive $1.8 billion, $70 million more than the current year.The request calls out a total of $2.2 billion for R&D related to advanced manufacturing at DOE, NSF, DOD, NIST, and nine other agencies. The focus on manufacturing follows Obama’s announcement last summer of an industry–government Advanced Manufacturing Partnership (see PHYSICS TODAY, August 2011, page 27). The initiative calls for collaborations that will invent and scale up new manufacturing technologies and provide shared facilities to help small- and medium-sized manufacturers become internationally competitive.Department of Energy. There is a wide disparity in the distribution of the 2.4% increase proposed for the Office of Science, which funds DOE’s nonweapons basic research. Declines are in store for the high-energy physics, nuclear physics, and fusion energy programs. The $14 million cut for high-energy physics, to $777 million, imperils the Fermilab-led Long-Baseline Neutrino Experiment. Energy Secretary Steven Chu told the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee on 1 March that DOE and Fermilab are trying to come up with a plan to keep the experiment alive despite the reduced funding.With its 3.7% decline, the nuclear-physics program would provide enough funding to operate the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at Brookhaven National Laboratory for just 10 weeks next year—half this year’s run time. But Steven Vigdor, Brookhaven’s associate director for nuclear and particle physics, says the lab has found sufficient internal money to operate the collider for 15 weeks. That’s about the minimum required for physics experimentation, he says, given that five weeks are required just to cool down the superconducting magnets, tune the beams, and shut the machine down. The nuclear-physics budget provides just $22 million for the $650 million Facility for Rare Isotope Beams, an accelerator project just getting under way at Michigan State University. That’s less than half the $55 million the university had been expecting next year. Budget documents state that the funding will support engineering and design efforts that are needed before DOE formally decides whether to approve the start of construction.A $3 million trimming of the fusion energy research budget, to $398 million, masks a big cut proposed for the US fusion laboratories. The request would raise the annual US contribution to the ITER fusion test reactor by $45 million, to $150 million next year, but would simultaneously cut back the domestic research program by $49 million. One of three US experimental fusion devices, MIT’s Alcator C-Mod, would be shut down altogether in 2013, halting work for the 100 staff members and 30 graduate students there, says Miklos Porkolab, director of the MIT plasma fusion center. In a 27 February letter sent to Holdren and Chu, Porkolab, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory director Stewart Prager, General Atomics vice president Tony Taylor, and other US fusion scientists warned, “If implemented, the $49 million cut contained in the budget request will result in the layoff of hundreds of fusion scientists, engineers, graduate students, and support personnel” and “will demote the US program to a second-tier player in the world fusion effort.” What’s more, the US commitment to ITER is slated to ramp up to a peak of $350 million in FY 2016—more than the total US fusion energy budget—according to the ITER agreement. “ITER is too expensive to be paid for out of the domestic program,” says Stephen Dean of Fusion Power Associates, an industry group.Asked about fusion, Holdren said that “the cutting edge of fusion right now is determining whether we will create a burning plasma,” and that ITER is “the only machine in the world that has a prospect of doing that.” Chu, testifying before the House Science Committee, noted that 80% of the US ITER contribution will be spent on components to be manufactured in the US.Funding for inertial confinement fusion would decline 3.1%, to $460 million. According to budget documents, the campaign to achieve fusion ignition at the National Ignition Facility will conclude at the end of FY 2012, when the facility will transition “to routine operations” in support of stockpile stewardship. Should ignition not be achieved by 30 September, researchers will work to develop a detailed understanding of the remaining physics challenges and will also consider alternative ignition concepts. “This will allow a discovery- rather than schedule-driven program that will provide more opportunities for comparison with simulations and feedback from them to resolve the outstanding physics questions,” the documents state.Coming out on the winning side at the Office of Science are the materials sciences, chemical sciences, geosciences, and energy biosciences research programs in the Office of Basic Energy Sciences, all of which would receive double-digit increases in FY 2013. All but 1 of the 14 scientific user facilities supported by the office would receive more funding, and the 46 energy frontier research centers would split a 20% increase, to $120 million. Funding for construction of the National Synchrotron Light Source II at Brookhaven would ramp down on schedule as it nears completion.DOE’s Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy programs are proposed to jump 29.1%, to $2.3 billion. A sixth interdisciplinary energy innovation hub, funded at $20 million, will be launched next year to address the research challenges associated with modernizing the electricity grid. The budget would provide the Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy, which funds high-risk, potentially high-payoff clean energy research, with $350 million, compared with $275 million currently.A 7% increase is proposed for R&D activities of DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration. Its nonproliferation and verification R&D programs would swell more than 50%, to $548 million. Those programs develop the technical capabilities to detect foreign nuclear weapons development, nuclear detonations, and the movement or diversion of weapons-usable materials; to monitor compliance with nuclear arms control and nonproliferation commitments; and to discourage the unnecessary spread of enrichment technology.Construction of the $6 billion Chemical and Metallurgy Research Replacement facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory has been deferred for five years. The plant was to have the capacity to manufacture dozens of replacement plutonium pits for nuclear warheads annually. Department of Energy R&D programs FY 2012 actualFY 2013 requestFY 2012–13 percent change (millions of dollars)* Total DOE 26 29927 1553.2 DOE R&D 11 42912 4689.0 Office of Science R&D programs 4 8744 9922.4 Total high-energy physics (HEP) 791777−1.7 Proton accelerator–based physics 422412−2.3 Research1231252.0 Grants research62632.0 National laboratory research61622.0 Facilities299286−4.2 Proton accelerator complex operations1031074.7 Proton accelerator complex support222723.9 Proton accelerator facility projects8559−29.9 Large Hadron Collider project and support73730.0 Other facilities†171915.0 Electron accelerator–based physics 232926.5 Research131411.1 Grants research5629.3 National laboratory research880.0 Facilities101545.1 Nonaccelerator physics 849715.8 Theoretical physics 67692.5 Advanced technology R&D (accelerators and detectors) 167150−10.4 Construction 2820−28.5 Total nuclear physics 547527−3.7 Medium-energy nuclear physics 1331352.0 Research3735−5.1 University research1918−5.7 National laboratory research1717−4.4 Other research11−5.7 SBIR, other17197.4 Operations77814.2 Heavy-ion nuclear physics 201197−1.6 Research4039−3.3 University research1413−5.7 National laboratory research2424−1.9 Other research22−3.9 Operations (primarily RHIC)161159−1.2 Low-energy nuclear physics 10698−7.2 Research5249−6.2 University research2019−5.4 National laboratory research3230−6.6 Operations (primarily ATLAS and HRIBF)3227−14.1 Facility for Rare Isotope Beams22220.0 Nuclear theory 3937−5.6 Isotope development and production 1919−1.9 Construction 5040−18.8 Total fusion energy sciences 401398−0.6 Science181154−14.5 Facility operations‡19422113.8 Enabling R&D2623−12.8 Total basic energy sciences 1 6881 8006.6 Materials sciences36142116.3 Chemical sciences, geosciences, and energy biosciences31634910.5 Energy frontier research centers (EFRCs)§10012020.0 Energy innovation hubs‖444811.0 Total scientific user facilities1 0091 0292.0 Operations73181010.8 Advanced Light Source, LBNL627012.9 Advanced Photon Source, ANL1231359.6 National Synchrotron Light Source, BNL36399.7 National Synchrotron Light Source II, BNL022— Center for Nanophase Materials Sciences, ORNL202310.7 Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies, SNL/LANL21238.0 Molecular Foundry, LBNL202310.7 Center for Nanoscale Materials, ANL202310.7 Center for Functional Nanomaterials, BNL202313.5 Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory, SLAC344223.5 High Flux Isotope Reactor, ORNL58603.4 Manuel Lujan Jr Neutron Scattering Center, LANL10100.0 Spallation Neutron Source, ORNL1811873.7 Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS), SLAC1241305.2 continued on next page Department of Energy R&D programs (continued) FY 2012 actualFY 2013 requestFY 2012–13 percent change (millions of dollars)* Research252710.0 Major equipment7332−56.5 Other project costs824200.0 SBIR23258.7 Construction151111−26.9 National Synchrotron Light Source II, BNL15147−69.0 LCLS II, SLAC063— Advanced scientific computing research (ASCR) 4414563.3 Biological and environmental research 6106252.6 Science laboratories and infrastructure 1121185.3 Program direction 1852039.7 Workforce development for teachers and scientists 1814−22.2 Safeguards and security 81843.7 Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy 27535027.3 Fossil energy R&D 34742121.3 Nuclear energy R&D 7657700.7 Energy efficiency and renewable energy 1 8102 33729.1 Electricity delivery and energy reliability 1391432.8 Total National Nuclear Security Administration R&D 3 2083 4357.0 Total weapons science, technology, and engineering1 5781 5790.0 Science campaigns3333505.1 Engineering campaigns1431515.6 Advanced simulation and computing618600−2.9 Inertial confinement fusion475460−3.1 National security applications101882.4 Directed stockpile work R&D#19622012.2 Nonproliferation and verification R&D35454854.8 Naval reactors1 0801 0890.7 Environmental management R&D 112088.3 *Figures are rounded to the nearest million. Changes are calculated from unrounded figures. † Includes $10 million to support “minimal, sustaining efforts” at the proposed Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory in South Dakota. Another $4.5 million is being provided from the Nuclear Physics budget. ‡ Includes $150 million for the US contribution to ITER, an increase from the $105 million appropriated for ITER in FY 2012. § Sixteen of the 46 EFRCs were fully funded in 2009 for five years with monies from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Funds for the other 30 must be provided from annual appropriations. ‖ Includes $24 million for the batteries and energy storage hub and $24 million for the fuels-from-sunlight hub. Department-wide, DOE is requesting a total of $140 million for its five existing hubs and for a new hub to focus on the electrical grid, to be initiated in FY 2013. # Includes the R&D support and R&D certification and safety items of the directed stockpile work program. ANL, Argonne National Laboratory. ATLAS, a Torroidal LHC Apparatus. BNL, Brookhaven National Laboratory. HRIBF, Hollifield Radioactive Ion Beam Facility. LANL, Los Alamos National Laboratory. LBNL, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. ORNL, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. RHIC, Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider. SBIR, Small Business Innovation Research. SNL, Sandia National Laboratories. NSF. Agency director Subra Suresh said he hopes the bipartisan congressional support for the 2.5% increase NSF received in FY 2012 is a sign that lawmakers will approve the 4.8% raise in the FY 2013 request. But the $7.4 billion request is a scaling back of the nearly $7.8 billion that Obama had wanted for NSF in FY 2012. An estimated $3.2 billion is provided for the individual-investigator-initiated research grant programs that make up NSF’s Research and Related Activities and Education and Human Resources accounts. Every field of science and engineering supported by NSF will see an increase in support, said Suresh. In 2013, he estimated, the agency will support 285 000 researchers, postdocs, trainees, teachers, and students, or 10 000 more than this year. NSF expects to award 12 000 new grants in 2013, an increase from the 11 700 awards the agency projects to make in FY 2012. Due to anticipated growth in the number of proposals received, from 53 400 this year to 55 000 in 2013, the success rate for applicants is expected to remain at 22%. NSF R&D programs FY 2012 actualFY 2013 requestFY 2012–13 percent change (millions of dollars)* Total NSF 7 0337 3734.8 Research and related activities (R&RA) Mathematical and physical sciences (MPS) Mathematical sciences2382453.0 Astronomical sciences2352454.3 Physics2772801.0 Chemistry2342444.2 Materials research2953032.7 Multidisciplinary activities3129−5.1 Total MPS 1 3091 3452.8 Geosciences (GEO) Atmospheric and geospace sciences2592642.1 Earth sciences1831893.1 Ocean sciences3523622.9 Integrative and collaborative education and research91910.0 Total GEO 8859062.4 Engineering 8268766.1 Biological sciences 7127343.0 Computer & Information Science & Engineering (CISE) Computer and network systems2122339.9 Computing and communication foundations1791958.9 Information and intelligent systems1761939.3 Information technology research85883.2 Total CISE 6547108.6 Office of cyberinfrastructure 2122183.1 Polar programs Arctic sciences1031095.6 Antarctic sciences70768.7 Antarctic infrastructure and logistics2572580.6 US Antarctic logistical support†68680.0 Polar environment, health, and safety777.3 Total polar programs 4364503.2 Arctic research commission 11−4.1 Social, behavioral, and economic sciences 2542602.1 Office of international science and engineering 50512.9 Integrative activities 35043223.4 Total R&RA 5 6895 9835.2 Major research equipment and facilities construction 197196−0.5 Education and human resources 8298765.6 Agency operations and award management 3003000.0 National Science Board 440.0 Inspector general 14140.0* Figures are rounded to the nearest million. Changes are calculated from unrounded figures. † Payments are from other federal agencies that use NSF-owned Antarctic facilities. A new emphasis is placed in FY 2013 on the OneNSF Framework—a set of seven research focus areas that cut across the agency’s organizational and disciplinary boundaries. Collectively, funding for those seven areas would surge by 56.3% above this year’s level, to $807 million. The Science, Engineering, and Education for Sustainability program, which addresses clean energy and sustainability issues, would rise to $203 million, from $157 million. A second OneNSF component, Cyber-enabled Materials, Manufacturing, and Smart Systems, would grow to $257 million, from $142 million; and a third, Cyberinfrastructure Framework for 21st Century Science and Engineering, would climb to $106 million, from $78 million. The expectation is that NSF will devote $355 million altogether for clean energy research, with particular emphasis on energy conversion, storage, and distribution. The $148 million requested for advanced manufacturing research at NSF includes robotics research, materials processing and manufacturing, and advanced semiconductor and optical device design. Support for major facilities and research equipment funding is just below 2012 levels, at $196 million.NSF’s Education and Human Resources division will see an increase of 5.6%, to $876 million.NASA. The space agency’s budget involved “some very difficult choices,” Holdren acknowledged, though he asserted that investments needed to sustain US leadership in space science and exploration will continue. NASA’s R&D programs, which include aeronautics research and the development of new space vehicles and technologies needed for human space travel, would increase $203 million, or 2.2%, to $9.6 billion. But the basic science programs would dip by 3.2%, to $4.9 billion. Planetary science would plunge more than 20%, mostly due to the administration’s decision to back out of participation in two European Space Agency–led missions to Mars, scheduled for launch in 2016 and 2018. Holdren insisted that the news didn’t augur the end of US interest in the red planet. “Mars is clearly the centerpiece of our planetary exploration program,” he said, citing the Mars Science Laboratory rover now on its way to the planet, two satellites presently orbiting Mars, and the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution probe due for launch in 2013. The NASA budget provides $628 million to keep the James Webb Space Telescope on track for a 2018 launch. NASA R&D programs FY 2012 actualFY 2013 requestFY 2012–13 percent change (millions of dollars)* Total NASA 17 77017 711−0.3 NASA R&D R&D programs Total Science 5 0744 911−3.2 Planetary science Discovery1731909.8 New Frontiers1611758.9 Technology145133−8.3 Planetary science research1741888.3 Mars exploration587361−38.5 Outer planets12284−31.2 Lunar quest14061−56.0 Total planetary science 1 5011 192−20.6 Astrophysics Astrophysics research1641767.4 Cosmic Origins2372401.3 Physics of the Cosmos1081123.2 Exoplanet Exploration515610.2 Astrophysics Explorer11275−33.1 Total astrophysics 673659−1.9 Earth science Earth systematic missions8818860.5 Earth system science pathfinder18821916.6 Multimission operations163162−1.0 Earth science research440434−1.5 Applied sciences3635−4.9 Earth science technology5149−3.3 Total Earth science 1 7601 7851.4 Heliophysics Heliophysics research1751792.1 Living with a star19623318.5 Solar terrestrial probes1891890.4 Heliophysics explorer program6046−23.4 New Millennium0.10−100.0 Total heliophysics 6206474.3 James Webb Space Telescope 51962821.0 Exploration Exploration systems development3 0072 769−7.8 Exploration R&D30033411.3 Commercial spaceflight406830104.3 Total exploration 3 7133 9335.9 Aeronautics research 569551−3.1 Space technology 57469921.8 Space operations International Space Station2 8303 00815.3 Space shuttle55671−87.3 Space and flight support80193516.7 Total space operations 4 1874 013−4.1 Cross-agency support 2 9942 847−4.9* Figures are rounded to the nearest million. Changes are calculated from unrounded figures. Department of Defense. Although the Pentagon’s overall R&D budget would decline 4.4% to $69.7 billion, the basic research component, designated 6.1, is maintained essentially unchanged at the current year’s $2.1 billion level. The 6.1 account provides about one-third of all federal support for research in computer science and engineering and an even greater share of funding for specific fields of electrical and materials engineering. Applied research (6.2) would decline by 5.5%, advanced technology development (6.3) would decrease 2.7%, and weapons system development would see a 4.6% reduction compared with FY 2012 levels. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency would be funded at $2.8 billion, essentially unchanged from the current year. Department of Defense R&D programs FY 2012 actualFY 2013 requestFY 2012–13 percent change (millions of dollars)* Research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) Total basic research (6.1) 2 1122 1170.2 US Army In-house independent research2121−0.8 Defense research sciences2142192.6 University research initiatives81810.1 University and industry research centers141123−12.5 Total US Army 456444−2.6 US Navy University research initiatives133114−14.6 In-house independent research18180.9 Defense research sciences4544734.1 Total US Navy 6056050.0 US Air Force Defense research sciences364362−0.7 University research initiatives152141−7.3 High-energy laser research1413−8.1 Total US Air Force 531516−2.7 Defense-wide basic research programs† DTRA basic research initiative4845−5.6 Basic research initiatives719159.4 Defense research sciences‡2913096.3 National defense education program84885.3 Basic operational medical research science38404.8 Chemical and biological defense research5351−3.9 Total defense-wide basic research programs 5205526.1 Applied research (6.2) 4 7394 478−5.5 Advanced technology development (6.3) 5 4115 266−2.7 Total science and technology (6.1–6.3) 12 26311 861−3.3 Other RDT&E§ 60 57457 792−4.6 Total RDT&E‖ 72 83769 653−4.4* Figures are rounded to the nearest million. Changes are calculated from unrounded figures. † Includes the basic research budgets of DOD agencies such as DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency; DTRA, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency; the Missile Defense Agency; and the Office of the Secretary of Defense. ‡ Includes DARPA’s basic research budget. The bulk of DARPA’s budget is provided from the applied research (6.2) and advanced technology development (6.3) categories. DARPA’s overall FY 2013 request is $2.8 billion, virtually even with its FY 2012 appropriations. § Includes RDT&E categories 6.4 through 6.7. ‖ Excludes medical research and R&D support in military personnel, construction, chemical agents and munitions destruction, and other programs.Department of Homeland Security. Homeland Security R&D rebounds 19.6%, to $1.2 billion, which partially restores steep cuts enacted in FY 2012 appropriations. The budget does not fund construction of the $150 million National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility, a replacement for an aging facility used to develop measures to counter emerging agricultural diseases. Instead, DHS will conduct a comprehensive reassessment of the need for the new lab. The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office budget would increase by 13.1% to gain back some of the 29% reduction it had incurred in FY 2012. Department of Homeland Security R&D programs FY 2012 actualFY 2013 requestFY 2012–13 percent change (millions of dollars)* Total DHS R&D 9861 17919.6 Domestic Nuclear Detection Office 29032813.1 Science and technology Acquisition and operations support5448−11.4 Research, development and innovation26647879.9 APEX R&D†14157.1 Border security R&D1632101.0 CBRNE defense R&D12719856.2 Counterterrorism R&D2251150.0 Cybersecurity R&D466440.7 Disaster resilience R&D61144134.0 University programs37409.4 Laboratory facilities176127−27.8 Management and administration1351382.2 Total science and technology 66883224.5 Coast Guard 2820−29.0*Figures are rounded to the nearest million. Changes are calculated from unrounded figures. † APEX R&D projects are described as cross-cutting, multidisciplinary projects that have been requested by DHS’s numerous operating units and are said to be “high-priority, high-value, and short turnaround in nature.”NIST and NOAA. NIST director Patrick Gallagher said that more than half of the $106 million increase proposed for his agency is to be focused on advanced manufacturing research. The request includes $21 million for a new program to provide cost-shared funding to industry-led consortia. Those teams are to conduct precompetitive research addressing major technical problems that are preventing small- and medium-sized US companies from more widely adopting advanced manufacturing capabilities. NOAA’s R&D budget would decline 3.8%, to $552 million, but the loss to basic and applied research components would be a steeper 6.3%, to $384 million. Department of Commerce (NOAA and NIST) R&D programs FY 2012 actualFY 2013 requestFY 2012–13 percent change (millions of dollars)* National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration R&D Total 574552−3.8 NIST R&D Total 75185714.1 Scientific and Technical Research Services (STRS)† 56764814.3 Technology Innovation Program‡ —— Construction of research facilities 55608.3*Figures are rounded to the nearest million. Changes are calculated from unrounded figures. † STRS includes NIST’s laboratories. ‡ Terminated in FY 2012. Other agencies. The Department of Transportation would receive $1.1 billion for R&D, a 14% increase from the current year. Its request includes funds for several activities that are part of the Federal Aviation Administration’s Next Generation Air Transportation System. The Environmental Protection Agency R&D program would increase $12 million, to $580 million. The US Geological Survey, the lead science agency in the Department of the Interior, would receive a $35 million increase, to $854 million.Federal funding for basic and apploied research under President Obama’s budget request for fiscal year 2013 would rise 3.3%, to $64 billion, matching levels last seen in the mid 2000s (excluding 2009, which included funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act). Overall, the president proposed $140 billion for federal R&D, a 1.4% increase compared with the amount appropriated in FY 2012. Whereas defense R&D, totaling $75.9 billion, would decline 1.5%, nondefense-related R&D would increase 5%, to $65 billion. Increases sought for NSF, DOE’s basic research programs, and NIST’s laboratory programs fall well short of the amounts needed to double their budgets over a 10-year period. The budget reemphasizes clean energy research and proposes new initiatives in manufacturing technology research.OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICYPPT|High resolution© 2012 American Institute of Physics.