Selected papers on the National Bureau of Standards

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Selected papers on the National Bureau of Standards
Physical Description:
Book
Language:
English
Creator:
United States -- Congress. -- Office of Technology Assessment
United States -- Congress. -- Senate. -- Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
Publisher:
U.S. Govt. Print. Off. ( Washington )
Publication Date:

Record Information

Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 22528790
System ID:
AA00022240:00001

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Page i
        Page ii
    Letter of transmittal
        Page iii
        Page iv
    Table of Contents
        Page v
        Page vi
    Letter of submittal
        Page vii
        Page viii
    Case study within the National Laboratories assessment
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Program on R. & D. policies and programs
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
    National Laboratories assessment report
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
    State of the Bureau address
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
    Reorganization: Explanation of the proposed change
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
    Back Cover
        Page 59
        Page 60
Full Text
'% I Y T P 1 9
co T T R P R IN T iiiiiiiiiii
1 0 5 t h C o n g r e s s
ft ft s e f o n f



SELECTED PAPERS ON THE NATIONAL
BUEU FSANAD


R F U g O Fii!!!!!!!!!!!
PIMPAMM A
. oN H WAD AN ON C ai ma
C O M M I T T E E O N C O M M E R C E, ~ii i |
S Q. I EN C E ., A N D T R A N S P O R T A T I ON |
U N I T E D S T A T E S S E N A TE


FLO

.. .. .... ... O CT
OCTOBER M8



Printed fo teus f h

Comte nCmecSiecadTasotto

US VEN TPITNG OFIC
WAH N:17
























CO MITE ONiii CiiMiiMiEiiCDiiii901iUiiNCE, ANDiiiii TRANSPORTATIONiiiiiii ii~i~iiiiiiii
HOWARDiiiiii W.CNiiN evdChim
WARN .MGNSNWsintn AE B EASN Kna
RUSLLB LN, o aaROET .GRFIN icia
E R N E ST~ii iiFii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiGiiii South!i~iii Carolinaii~~iiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiTEiiiiiiiiiiiiDiiiiii ST EV E N Siiiiiii
AI ELiiii K.IOYHwi ARYGLWTR rzn

AiDiLAIii E.SEESN liiiiiiiiiCiiiODiiiego
WENDEL H.ii FORD Ketuk HARRISO H.~i SCHITT New iiii Mexicoiiiiiiiiiiii=ii
JOHiii N~iiliiiiiiiiiilii~ A .i~iiii D U R K ii l~ii iiii i iiii I Niii! iiii=i iiiiii= N e H iampi shii i re JOH C. D AN FO RTH =iiiMiiiiiliiiiiiiiii=lii u iiiii
E D W A RDiiiii~ iiiiiii iI S Y iiiiN ebraska== .ii=iiii~iiiiiiiiii=iiiiiii :ii ii iiiii
DONALD~ii! W. RIEiE JR. Miciga
iiiiiiiiiiiiii~iiiiiiiiiiiiBRiEYi L SA v s S taffiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii ii e o an C hie [ iliiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Iiiii~ ~ ~ ~ ~~E~i K.i HALL, Generai i iii Counseiiiiii ii il iii iiiiii i iiiii iiiiiiii i i i
iiiiiiii ~~M AL OL M B SiTERREii, iiiiiiiiviiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iSiiiitiiiiiifiiii...iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil~ii iiiiiii~ ~iiiiii~iin )i










LETTERiiiiiiii OFiiiiiiiii T A I TTALiiiiiiiiiii~~iiiiiii !iiiiiiiii



bee in iain h t h ueus s ien iic andi teh icail capa-iiiiiiiii
biites ha e e li d Thi yer he om itte oni~i Commerceiiiiii
Since and~ Trnpottin tro g isSu c mite on S ienceiiiiiiiiiiii
T cn lg ,a dS aecn u tdteSn t'firsti ovr iht hear igsiiiiiiiiiii
on teB ra nis7 -erhsoy t i))) ouri~~ hope))~ii) to~ ~ iii~~ remedy pastiiiiiiii

neglect and help))H ))))) insure)) tha th Bueaus eso rce ar ued ffetivly
Afe overigh hearings) and) hearings onthe StandadReferenc
Data Act,))) the)) comm)t)ee reported))) a) bill))) that, for the first time
plce th Buea on)) a)) peioicauhoiztin ass.Ths roiso
was)) considered fa oa ly b )he Hse))) and))))) funds)) for the Bureau ))))
will now)) )))) ))) be)))) rea th rizd n 2yers nseadofon cntiuig b si
(Pu li LawHH 95-322).) We))))) hopeH this arrngement ill help Congres
and)) the) Nation) be)))) mor aw reo teBueu' ap biiie ees

Thi documen contains) maeral whichhave een ueful o the
c o m m it t e e a n d w ill a id it s f u t u r e r e v ie w o f) t h e B u r e a u 's o p e r a t io n s. ) )))))))) )))) )))) ))))) )))) ))))) )))) )))) )))) )))) )))))))))) ))))))))))))) ) )))) ))))) )))) ))))) )))) )))) )))))))))) )))))) )))))) )))) )))) ) ))))))))
In clu d e d a re, a rep o rt b y th e O ffi ce o f T e ch n o lo g y A ssess m en t, a n) ) )))) )))) ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) )))) ))))) )))) )))))) )))))) )))) ))))) )))) )))) )))) )))))) )))) )))) ))) )))))) )))))))))
e x la a t o o f(((0)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) th e, r e e n r e o r g a n iz a tion)))))))))))))))))))))0))))0))))))))))))))" o f)))) th e B u r e a u,))) a n d t h e 1 9 78)))))))))))))))) ))))))))N O)))))O))))))))))% )))) )% )))))0)))0(0(,( ...............................................
state of))) the) Bureau) mesgeb isne ircor r.E netAm lr
We) believe these materials may be of *interest to many persons in ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )) J))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))H)
Goermet industry, acaemi and) th gnra pbic T)nsr
t h e ir g e n e r a l a v a il a b il ity w e h a v e a s k e d th a t th is d o c u m e n t b e((((((((((((( ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((o ((( ((())(()(()((())(( (((((((((((((((((((((((())(((((()))(((((())(( (((( ) (((( )))(((( ))()(())(((())(((( ) ((((() ))((((( ((((()(((((((( ((((( ((()
p u b l i s h e d))) a s a c o m m i t t e e )))))))))))))) )))))))) )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) )))) )))))))))))))))))))))))))) )) p r i n t .)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))())))))))))) ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
W e w is h t o))))))))))))))))))))))))) e m p h a s iz e )))))))))))))))))) t h a t ))))))))))))))))) t h is d o c u m e nt)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) h as))))))))))))))))))))) n e it h er)))))))) b e en)) a p-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) )))))))) ))))))))))))))))) ))))))))))




















)


A ~i



V















4


I





4~>4



I





I






















COTENTS

?pgo
L etteriiiiiiiii of Sub m ittal --------------------------------------------
++Ca s+e+++ ++ stu d y++ ++ +++i++++++hin th e.......................... +++ + .
Programiin.R...iD.i....cies and programs -----------------------------73
Natona L bor to ies ase sm n re or -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 11iiiiiii iii ii ii
iiiiii iofi thei B u ea add es --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- 39i i i+ iii iiiii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii E p a t ion ofiiii the proposedi change+~~iiiiiii++ii+i++ ------ ----- ----- 51ii









































































A




















on Cmec, e, and Trnpottin .. Sente





W ashington++. + + ++++ .++ + +++. ++'+, +, ..++'+ ++, +
DEAR MR ., CHAIRMAN:+ I,.. am plese to transm',', + ; ,it th enloe OTA. ... +,, +, +,
documen, ... .. Naioa Burea of Stadads A.asSud
Within the Naioa Laortoie Assessment% +:.+' .".' ,.,.+ + +.'++
This,++ case+ stud is an inpu to ,+, OTA' assesmen of national labora-,, ..

































/










A





































(











NATIONAL BUREAU.OF STANDARD
X. N' STUD' WITHIN Tni@ NATIONAL LABORAToRms AssrcssmExT
FopxwoRD
1':The Federal Government now spends about $28 billion per year
an research and development activities and facilities in. the United
States. With'another $20 billion per year- from the private sector, the
toW n ational investment in R. & D. in the United States approaches
50 billion annually.
. Larie though this total is, Wportrays only the tip of the iceb&
df the overall impact of R. & D. on the economy and the quality 01
Hie our society. For R. & D. is the engine that drives the currents
of dwn our civilization. From R. & D. stem the inventions tech-
niques, an4 processes that propel innovations throuth our economic
and social system. Moreover, it has been estimated t at, on the aver-
age, otch person engaged in R. & D. eventually generates 6 to 10 other
jobs throughout the economy. As a consequ nce, the $50 billion annual
Aational investment in R. & D. has a massive multiplier effect on our
entire s6cioeconomic system.
Therefore, it behooves the Congress to consider this investment
car"y and p ,y close attention to the ways in which it is allocated
and used, as weu as to the framework of laws, regulations, incentiveN
and constraints whereby the fruits of scientific research and develop-
Awnt an converted into operational results.
Furthermore, R. & D. and the procesSs innovation help to de-
termine the options and establish many of the parameters whereby
specific technologies can be assessed for their potential impacts on
sodety. In order to assess a particular technology, OTA compares if-A
advanttges and disadvantages with those of alternative technologlea
and assesses its impact on economic, social, environmental, and politi-
cal factors within a perspeotive of probable future human needs,
capabilities, and values.
Tpcaxry out its assessments effectively, OTA needs a thorough
understanding of the Nation's R. & D. effort and of the process whaeby
R. & D. results are converted into useful iianovations.'While helping to
strengthen and integrate OTA!s overall assessment activiti6i, such
understanding also enables; OTA to assist the Congress in better
thA natioxW investment in R. & D. by develo are
ping p1w M
solin-dly based R.4 D. policies and'priorities. Thus through si!e4
uaderstandihg OTA can mwe effectively fulfill its mandate to give
Congress early indication of the impacts of technological change.:..
I the urging of a number of con res-
sional. eoum'ttees and. individual members, tbe ,-OTA,. BWd au-
0"'orm*d, a Vr: ir .of R. & D. PoEcies and ritiesyvhich became
ay
q







Recognizing that such an
out through a single, corr
address all facets of the pro
ceed through a series of ma
help to build an
pacts of our
IThe program as oprae
advisory panels made up of d
industry, labor, the profess]
and public interest movemer
The Panel on the ealtb
prise, chaired by Dr. Hamv
Technology and Public PoIP
cmdwith ways we can mai
of the entire scientific and te
The Panel on the Applicai
by Dr. Lewis Branscomb, -
IBM Corp., has been conce
apply science and technology
tion, augment America's ir
national and social problems
The Panel on Decision Mi
chaired by Dr. Gilbert
Science of the University of
we improve the decisionmak
dishes policies and ties f
alof thm nene to inoi
xiss ofR. & D
The third of these reports
Case Study Wit the Nati(
o final report of tatproje
this case study i being madi
Subcommttee on Scence, Ti
sight hrgs onithe Natior


PROUGRAMC ON R.& .POI
Rusl W.Peterson, Director,







Dr. Preton? AA
Commiso.
Dr. R. WStephen Berry, Cr
Dr. Lewis M. Branscomb, ai










a. = ii~ ii iiii i
D r. "ii" iiiIiliiii B ro ks B enja m i Pe r e P r fe so of= T echno= ===i==i !! il i~ii~liiiiilii~ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii l P ublic
A filcy arvard U niversity.
iiiii iii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Buchsbaumiiiiii iiliiiiipiineiLaboratories.
D r. R obert.... A -ii ====iiiliiii iiiiiriesiideiiiiii, Caboti C oirp.iiiiiiiiiiii
..Dr Golnd Presdent Sothes Researc Instituite.iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Dr Le odeg@ieco mrts ii ied Research Scholar, Kit
N O .................. O bsiiiiiivaiiiiiry.
Dr Jerr Gry IneedetCnslat
Dr:ChlsJ.HtcPesdn ore o heFtrIc
J4 oadF.HriDietr ntricpir PrgrminHelhHavr
iiiii of... Pu li Health.iii
Dr ihadM Kas, i~tr..ina..tiueo .Alry. n nfciu
1)166 ~~~~... Nainliittueif elh

Or. &6Nader Indeenden.Co.sltant
%- irs Th disr Ts oreprvdd dicciiii~,ad sisac
though hi sesmn cs tuy orwih h TAsaf sdepygatfl






Standards. Although mucih valuable
overall national laboaoisassm
it was clear that the current
Cnrssfor NScudb elsr
report priortoitsr e asaper
fore, this report is beig made aval
problems and ise eaigt n
toies, NBS, and to nt a
oversght committee have for addr(
This report notes that several of
tories issues are of particular mo


sures on basic research; and mana
more minor issues specific to NBS a,
Well.
Each major issue can be addresse
by congressional oversight commtt(


ISSUE 1: NBS







fiTp it "f cilitate technological innovation in industry. .
W f gl 4n'this category.
udgeWy decisions made by either the parent agency, or by
ce 6f sa termine the kinds of activ'
th'.. %ement and Budget, de
iqs ,at are d at the NBS. The approval by the OMB of a
*w514tiative in fiscal year 1979 which allows an exploratory program
ln ,, OQIDerqtive technology" to assist failing industries, and the dis-
ap of i maj or measurements- oriented program in air and water
DOU446n Austrate how such'decisions direct the way in which the
F reaU Purs.ues its activities.
of this variety'of definitions of its mission, NBS has had
kculty addressing all the activities it has been asked to perform,
and -h s. no clear sense of *t as to which activities, if any, require
more coacentration. Additional, NBS is unable to continue to serve
as the Nation's lead laboratory for a wide and complex field-measure-
es, d standaMs-and also respond adequately to the
eht. stielic an
t6chnic4, s"ce support demands of other agencies, the Congress,
ahd Wirectly,.the private sector. This stems mainly from the fact
that support work performed by NBS on funding from other agencies
not include resources to build competency for future work. The
weak'P 'k betWeen the missions of NBS and that of the parent agency
iiaslea to little support for NBS during the budget process and when-
ever personnel limitations are distributed throughout the Department.
The nwTow interpretation by the OMB as to what work should be
allowed within NBS has led, to an inability on the part of technical ex-
perts to prepare for potential measurement and standaxds needs in
many E*J&, especially environment, health, and energy.
Poli'mi optim's
Although numerous, options are presented in the report for the Con-
='to utilize in addressing this issue, the OTA has selected the fol-
owing three.as most likely to yield beneficial results.
Opfion. I.-The course of action most likely to have a substantial
effect on N13S would be for the Congress to consider a review of the
NBS Organic Act and to amend this act to tighten up the definition
and limitations on its role. The Congress could stipulate, for example,
thst. all NBS work must be measurements or standards related, thus
removing the division in its mission. The Congress could clarify
whether or not NBS is authorized to interact with the private sector
in areas of research or technical support, other than those relating
to measurements and standards. Pos d'ble new roles for NBS could be
also cQnsidered, say. in the axea of information support for regulatory
denisionmaikin as well.. The main disadvaxUge to this action would
nov9 of the possibility of using NBS as the last resort. for
tQ4nical work not covered by other agencies as part of their missions.
Mv *ages would be restoration of a single cohesive core function to
laboratory, removal of-sources of tension as to support and re-
sources for their work, and a more effective linking of all NBS functions
with thAt of its parent agency.
Central to, tMsrevievi of the Orgaw'c Act would be congressional.
'd it' a of a yeaxly. budrtary authorization for N TIL
consi er la. is
W944,req*e NBS to 4anf' its i0rities and defend its program
,choim to Congress, Mild 6vide the opportunity to present a
401. ure work ; and would allow theAt pict' of NBS to Ke Congress on-
gress to,6xpress its support for or disagreement with NBS priorities.








merce to articulate how the missiono NBSi nertdwt n
rlted to the ovrl Commemsin pcfcly hpritaec

technical support actvte fo teIgnisaevee y'h

than those which are measrmnsostnadretd.Tepiiv
impact of this action wouldbe the epeso fa nertdrl o
NBS within the CJommerce Deartmet whctol laomr
interest for and support of NSatvte yteprn gny
,especially duigbudgetaypoedns

_NS ntgrate an exanded economic pesetv c noispann n
-,ririysetting procsses. This wouldisrthtmtBueupo
: gram justifications were pesented to teDprmn fCmec
in terms that related to teCmec iso.I ol loisr
that Bureau activities were piritized4tlzn oe hnjs h
~criteria of scientific interest. tAmodsefotiprendinheica
year 1979 budget along telie.Cnrscodsuptthstm
and emphasize the inmportance of expadn hsfncinwti B
,even further!

1, sE 2: OMB $ I LEAD AGENCY" ) CEPPRCITESMNGET

The OMB requires that NSfindfudnfrmla grcetoo
work in areas already covered by the msin fohraece uha
energy, environment, and health,evnisuhwrismel atc
ipation of measuremen nedadhsntbendrcleuse
by the other agencesor b h oges vni ae hr h
activity hias been required bymnae smtmswthu udn

approach the lead agnytogetthneddfdigororpora




and givse itnt the lea agency

for completec bulig asa;iecntg1fistoa4prtn
budget, nldn te gnyfns h ogescudadtoal
stipulate thatwokpromdudrItifudnwolbeath
.discretion of teDrco fNSadcudivleatcptr




7
ex, than requested) by the other a ency or identified by NBS
im -as necessary. OMB could'est evaluation criteria which
Would'itipulate that other agency deadlines and needs be met durmi
the ormance of another agency's work by the NBS or control 0
the unding would be remanded to the lead agency.
WW... :..: i:
USUM: a" NIM STAFF 19 AGINGp TURNOVER IS LOW, PERSONNEL CEILINGS
INHIBIT ABILITIES
like many other institutional R. & D. perfo is facin
diftultimwith organi ational flexibility due to its brinlkling or steady
state staff. The most useful and uinagin tive research and development
is pwformed when there is a steady.infusion of new ideas and a -
.proaches, usually provided by expansion- of staff with young peopTe,
A*. tvy.::& fair degree of rotation of individuals in and out of an organiza-
.ti t. NBS is limited in its opportunities to bring in fresh staff members,
Md4m been so limited for the better part of a decade. This has led to
lock--of up-to-date expertise in some axess, lowered morale, and a
Aperted dedine in its ability to perform first-rate research.

0pt win I.-The Congress could expl re possible changes in the civil
somee 117st which could create a senior scientific service,.preserving
ure _T1 ts, butallowing for increaseA mobility of scientists among
-national a oratories, including contractor orindustry-operat.edlabora,
stores. Such action would not onl il
laboratorie y benefit NBS and other civ service
..s but would also help alleviate similax staffmg difficul-
ties in ot er t .. esof national laboratories as well This 0 tion could
be:pursued initially by exploring the options available witT the Civil
Serlice. Commission and various laboratory directors. This effort
shoiAd take account of and utilize the opportunities presented by the
*rreut Presidential review of the civil service system.
Optiom 2.-The Congress could encourage the D art e t of Com-
weice and the OMB to allow NBS to maintain a formalize I of
term personnel appointments, say of 3 to 5 years' duration. Tfe pool
would be funded directly- each year on a regular basis, would not be
subject to an ce ings, and would be distributed
..;y overall personnel ili
annuQy within the Bureau, at the discretion of the Director, to areas
-of greatest scientific, need and interest. This would usure that the
laboratory has a group of individuals with a high degree of turnover
and/or mobility within the organization, creating at least a mininiaJ
-flow of new ideas and insights into the oneoing technical work.
.Option 3.-The congremonal oversighCcommitteeS could ex
the current reorganization of NBS to, assess whether this mechanism
contribute substantially to laboratory flexibility. The questions
the Congress might concern themselves with include whether the
reorganization is merely a change of names with staff essentia,11y
perfarming their old functions; whether new management techniques
be irL tituted to provide fresh approachego whether and ho* the
balance of research staff to' tAministrative 'support -staff: will be
Afifted diio to the prftosedi c Whether ih&xibilities in internal
stAp m6boity will bi 70vercomely the recirganization; and whetlier
616'h i i ation.
stiff Mor as beft 6t fdved or dete6orated by reorgani









The ability of atehiaoraiaintprvdacutemsr-
ments and standards at the foerotof a numer of aeso cec

professional staff mi those rs;SipythNl tafmtbeigy
comp etent in eacharaweeterexetsisdmnd.Ts




rseaht ie to ev asi a reeci eahaedfsiecvn ,-
b i gmportnt ito w





exp ied.M fiie ep
forl deaili!iiliilingiii~ ithi hisii ii issue som of the opton isiggesteii eaxifo



clriyngad deiigtetSmsincul lola obnfca

......s on thsbscrsac rbe ,Frea pe ft prn
agnyexlctl lnsisonmsinihta fNS tmgtb

stmltd t ev samr fetveavct o n h








bugtr rcs raltelbrtr' edicuigrsuc




9
y tio n 2 T h e C o n g r e s s c o u ld s u p p o r t a b u d g e t in it ia t iv e f o r N BS




w o k l h u h t e C n r s a i s ................... i isiiiiiiiiiii........ 'in ra l
i v l e wih a p e e o te h i ki n orde to ........................ as ur .............. va iityiiii
..................... impartality thiiciid beiiii byriring NBS toiiain-iiii
tantgtmntrn n ult oto rcdrsfrcnrc

w o r k .i .....i= H ......Hii i =iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
................. ISSUES' ''' RELTIG PEIFCALYTOND

A~~iiiiiii feiteisussufcdi h xmiaino ,w ic doiiiiiiiiii

no alwihnte vrl tpc ndreainto n h T ntoa
lab o ra to ries............................... ..................e.................. ............... in th e re p o rtiiiiiiii
for.............the congressio...................ttees.

T h s ot e ............ in c.............
T h ei u n i n n s o nii th e p art. o fiiit uiize..................................................................... i
technka supr okt te gnis
Concern abu h prto fteNtoa cdm fSine vlainiiiiiiii
p a n e ls............................... iiiiiiiiiii
Coneers abou the anagemnt of.he.reote laoratoriin BulderColo.
...an diiiiiii
:The ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~... apaetlakoiirniedesiiitiiB wihhs e oa oen
traio o deisonakig owr cpait i on o te N S taf ofies wichiiiiiiiii
shoud fuctio norallyonlyin a advsorycapaityioithiDirctor

CONCLiiiUiiiii

Thi OT reortfids hattheissesreltin totheNa ialiiii
Buea iiiiiiii iiiiniiiiisiareiiiioiiiintitoiitheifutureiihealthiofisoiieiasp iits




4)


) ~rf N








~ ~


NW 1A4444~ ;~ H <~

4i I ~&~) ~ U 4

44~~



A ~w~i
~)<~~4 ~

N ~' ~
# $~ #~I~ ~
~4









4 <4<44

44 4<





ii

U


V































444











INTRODUCTION
This report is the product of a case study of the National Bureau of
Standards conducted under the national laboratories assessment
project of -the R. & D. policies and priorities program, Office of Tech-
nol. &9sessment. Under the national laboratories assessment, the
program has been exploring a set of broad pohey issues that
concem iiational laboratories in this country. The present study is an
analysis of the current NBS situation in terms of these issues. -
Recent problems at NBS have received considerable attention in
tae scien-tific, C --Unty and the science affaui-s press. A headline in
CAE News characterized the Bureau as "overworked," while Science
dewaibed NBS as having suffered "a fall from grace," reported that,
'finalaise pervades its headquaxters," and noted that "Jo]fficials and
labamtory scientists there see a pattern of declining performance and
mp&bility that began 10 years ago and picked up speed within the
past 5 years. , I
These press accounts are based in part on reports from the NBS
statutory Visiting committee, and from the National Academy of
Sciences evaluation panels, which report on the Bureau annually
uDder omtract, as well as on statements of NBS officials and te,,:,ti-
mony before the House Science and Technology Committee. To the
extent they are accurate, they portray an extremely serious situation
at the Bureau.
For this assessment, OTA staff and contractors conducted a Durnbe
of site visits to the Bureau-a total of 2% days at NBS headquarters
in Gaithersburg, Md., and I day at the NBS Boulder Laboratories.
We, interviewed administrative officials and laboratory scientists from
all parts and levels of the organization, while also collecting docu-
ments and materials. A total of 57 NBS staff members, were inter-
viewed, some individually, some in groups. We also met twice with
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Science and Technology Jordan
Baruch, and once with the OMB budget examiner res onsible for the
NBS budget, Dianne Cormier, and we contacted by te.Yephone a num-
ber of other relevant individnals. Names of all interviewees appear in
appendix A at theend of this report.
This report draws upon our interview notes as well as the publica-
tions, and documents listed in appendix B. It exan mies *in turn each
of the issues identified by the national laboratories task force as rel-
evant to con gresslonal concerns, but only as those issues apply to.
.NBS. These issues, which are discussed in an internal working paper
entitled,- "National Laboratories Issues, 2d Revision,"' are the
product of extensive deliberations among members of the task force.
Sevaul issues which do not apply to NtA have been omitted. A num-
ber of additional issues of specific concern to NBS are treated in a
I I'NBS Overworked, Looks to Congress for ReIlef," C&E News (Nov. 7, 1977) p. 25
Gina Bari Kolath, "National Bureau of Standards: A Fall From braw, Science ?Sept 2,'
1977), pp. 968-970.
OTA R. & D. Program Document No. H 77-M May 9, 1977.





12

separate section at the end of the paper. A subjeto onieal
current interest at the Bureau, th ngror
separately in an internal working report of the OTA.

THE NATIONALBUREAU o1F- STANDARDS
In manyr ways the National Bureau of Stanards cuisauiu


for

brodest national iborthe a
mission-wihicue rvdn h ain-ihasinii ai


Brau ha rtem
a center scaitfa technical enpsport-hia

Thae sntiali t

entity, :
of asirieseach in phical scince Bniutnosypasa




do e i din i sei

tion, and the O of of mica is to
lBra atos lngieenkonfris-cetiisn nier x


phates asiise elaivti te ntttos ntepseea










$123.6 mio, of wih$62.9 th







the Ihtitut for Mta eermou gM


pclce inthesccand technology e




13

D Applied Technology, IAT, (672 p6rsons), a unit oriented to
pmblem-aolving activities for industry and other Federal a encies; aud-
thb.Institute for Computer Sciences and Technolog (177 per-
sons), Wunit which provides standaxds, research, and technical advice
aimed: at u'nprovingg the use of computers in the Federal Government.
ZaaL. institute is comprised of several divisions, and each division is
knVmized into sections, the latter comprising the basic operating units
a,* Bureau. Under the reorg zation, IBS, IMR, and IAT will be
iheorporated' into two unitsArei National Engm*eeringy Laboratory
(NEL) and the National Measurements Laboratory (NML), while
ICST wiH remain substantially in its present form.
Th Bureau's director, Ernest Ambler, held his post in an acting
eapae for 2% yeaxs, and received con Tessional confirmation early
in 19781 He is assisted in his decisionmaking functions by an executive
-board, 7including (prior to the reorganization) the heads of the several
in$tituteg 'and, a number of other administrative officers, and by a
mugTfam offiee, which is concerned with the development, presenta-
U)i,. and: administration of the NBS budget. A statutory visiting
committee advises the Secretary of Commerce, and the Department,
using:NBS funds, also contracts with the National Academy of
86ences-National Reseaxch -Council for annual panel evaluations of
each major unit.
ISSUES
MISSION AND ROLE DEFINITION
Probably the key f actors ov Ing the organizational health of
a national laboratory are theglefiTtions of its missions) and roless.
kThe mission of the laboratory derives from the mission of the support
agency and is'often perceived differently by the laboratory and the
imply that a lab has to serve only a single,
n on, or that its mission cannot change over
t is im. ortant that at a given point the labor-
atory staff have a firm idea orw1hat the laboratory is supposed to be
doing, and how its activities fit into their sponsoring agency's
mission and its larger societal context. . U11certainty about
mission in a laboratory is often at the root of a variety of organiza-
tional ills including low morale and declining productivity.4
In contrast to many national laboratories, the National Bureau of
standards has a mission which is clearly spelled out by statute. The
NBS Organic Act of 1901 (Public Law 56-177), as amended in 1950
,(by. Pu lic Law 81-619) authorizes the Secretaxy of Commerce to
undertake the following functions:
The custody, maintenance, and development of the national standards of meas-
urearnent, and the provision of means and methods for making measurements
consistent with those standards used in scientific investigations, engineering,
Inanufacturing, commerce, and educational institutions with the standards
,adq)pted or recognized by the Government.
, , The, determination of physical constants and properties of materials when such
d4a are of great importance to scientific or manufacturing interests and are not
4o. be obtained of sufficient accuracy elsewhere.
Cooperation with other governmental agencies and with private organizations
.in tho bstablishment, of standard practices, incorporated in codes and specifications.
J Lvise ce to Government agencies on scientific and te6nical problerns.
I ut development of devices to serve special needs of the Government.
"'MUonal Labamtorles 11soues," op. elt, pp.





















:re


Uto. Sut
.of purpose
NS assist
research, t.
functions d





15
other key to clarif ing the Bureau's mission is its relationship
to the overall mission oT the Commerce Department. Despite the
hno-terxn ninportance of its contribution to the Nation's scientific
4nd technological infrastructure, and hence to the maintenance of
Axhmnerce, the work of NBS appears to have relatively little direct
rWvAion to the day-to-day activities and concerns of its parent agency.
AEsbarically, officials at the Department level have not demonstrated
gvmt deal of understanding of the potential contributions of the
., ureka's measurements and standards work to departmental objec-
-Air"Aws rbsult, the D!partment has not been a partieularly strong
-*dvbckte- for -the Bureau s interest& Related to this is the fact that
-Ake external constituency for the standards and measurements
mission, although broad based, is diffuse and not particularly strong
:,..Or melt organized, and does not overIV to any great extent with the
-.4anstituencies for other Commerce Department nuissions. And for
officials have not been particularly effective in
i.attimlating, to their Commerce Department superiors how economic
jiW*ectives can be furthered through the scientific and technical
4etivitim of the laboratory.
i:- -,Allefthisis art of a larger and more fundamental problem relating
Tekting to thelederal Government's role in the support of R. & D.
Vutbweivilian economy. While there is apparently national consensus
7114fidd. the notion that the Government should play some role in
Tmvidingthe scientific and technological infrastructure for the civil-
7 III=.jeconomay, the nature and. extent of that role have never all been
clearlyrl, defined. A variety'of programs has been roposed, anYsome
inplemented (for example, th e erimen
e XP tal R. & D. incentives
%pwgr&&,..of the National Science Toundation, and DOC's State
, oiecfivkalservices program) with only scattered results to show for the
-efforts, invested. Until b th Congress and the executive branch
Vr*wwusly address the question of what is needed in thp w
a
tific and technological infrastructure, what part the Fedel OGfoNveiarn-
mient, should pla in provi in various parts of the execu-
tive kw2dh, particularly the Commerce Department, can be motivated
toxontribute to it, the overall problem will remain and NBS, which
Tmvi&s some of the infrastructure, will have difficulties in its relations
-with DOC.
1:1 Shortbf a com. rehensive.resolution ofthis problem, then are'a
IMMber. of Possix approaches to articulating aAd clarif the
t-interpretation of the NBS mission for measurements and standards.
1 Vbffie optidolms axe. (1) The Department could examnin its own mission
-andnake an explicit attempt to strengthea the ties between the By-
and standards work and the other activities of the
- pepwtment; (2) NBScould integrate an expandtd economic perapec-
_04 -into its plt*ng xV n rit 'i; and (3) the
t procesm
PO M_,bilit3i.of Temoving a au Pommerce Depai6ment
-vould be;'considerie&
rimfirst option could stimulate the: DeparLment to WVe as a D16re
,4WOvi, advocate for the Bureau's measurement and 9tandods work,
IyotkvM the-Executive Officeand with Cowess.
The 86cond, option could amist- the: Bureaia m assassmv" Jmpor-
u4ce of its activitim as they relate to overall Commeme epartment
01biedtives, In fact, for fiscal year 1Mj the Office of Management anA
-Budget inserted, a modest planning initiative. in the NDS budget,





16

including a charge to examine NBS priorities in economic terms.
This is at least a ste in the right direction.
The third option, that is, the transfer of NBS out of DOC, has been
suggested several times. Some proposals have called for integration. of
NBS into a central scientific and technical agency or department, while
others have suggested that the Bureau become, an independent agency.
The potential effects on both the Bureau and the Department axe -6n-
certain. Much analysis of this move, and its effects on the measure-
ment and standards system in this Nation, would have to be performed
prior to serious consideration of removal of NBS from the DOC juris-
diction. Therefore, this option probably does not merit,.-careful con-
side-ration until serious efforts have been made to address the other
approaches.
The relationship to the Comm ce Department of the Bureau's
technical support services for other agencies is even more problemati-
cal than its measurement and standards work. Since these services
support other functional areas, outside of Commerce, there is even less
enthusiasm for these activities at the Department level. Although
other agencies do provide funds for the service work, they traditionally
do not provide the funds to build the in-house competency to, sustain
such service work.
At the same time, however, the Bureau's reputation for technical
excellence, the wide range of its talent, and its sheer availability
in an era of indreasing Government involvement in technical mat-
ters have led to a marked growth in demand for its technical support
services. Other agencies increasingly seek its aid, and Congress has, on
numerous occasions in recent years, stipulated or pre I cipitated NBS
involvement in new programs without always providing funds for the
purpose. The result has been the addition of many new responsibilities
to the Bureau without net growth, sometimes forcing management
to opt for displacement of portions of the Bureau's core measurement
and standards function.
Another difficulty is that the Bureau has been directed by certain
legislation to act in a role to support industry on specific technical mat-
ters. It has never been clarified whether the intent of Congress was to
expand the NBS support function to 'industry in total, or onlyfor those
particular activities stipulated in the legislation.
I Two options seem possible for clarifying the role of the NBS support
mission and fordealing with the competency needed in order to provide
such technical services. The first would be for the Department to
recognize that technical support services are a part of the overall
commerce mission, but simply have been assigned by statute to one of
their units, NBS. Then Commerce would be more encouraged to
advocate the need for the Bureau to obtain direct funding for com-
etency building in those areas during the budgetary process. This
would require a complete inventory 'of the technical service support
work now onzoino at NBS, and an assessment of the complementary
direct funding required for competency 'building in -order 'to fulfill
service obligations. There should also be a long-range planning effort
to identify areas of future serv ice support needs, in order to,' prepare
the Bureau to 'respond in a timely faAidn. For example, if it seems
.likely that other agencies. will be requesting futur. e technical support
in an area such as environmental sciences, Ahe Bureau couldbe
allowed to build up a modest degree of competency-in anticipation.






approve by OMB forfi cal year 1019 'does allo Va m 6&st
c6ni c building fund, ilihough'it I is ng yet cle4r h u'&
bm N wil have in deternimiln'' the areas towhich that fun dih9
n ftpply.
V e'se'cohd option would be fo-t other ftlZen y fund tTausfers to
include, a certain percentage of on-the-top. hinding to build U'P com-"
p#t0L.q-y'br replenish depleted stores of ex 8e 'This is d:common
practice utilized by the Department of Ene7gy in. financin' applied
W'64P# s pye opmen work at severaIna b1laboratories. t is also.
didno. by. the Depa I
rtment of Defense in its contracting with the'
aeroVace industry for development work. Sirong congressio nal and-
d9pif"tmental 8upport for clauses to support this tjpe-of fti ditlg ITX
the agro6mentg Olverning transfers ffonl. other agencies would* most
likOly, berequire5 ) however.
third option would not provide a means of obtaiiiing compete I ne
supppit for technical services, but would remo, the need for, sue
support .. This would be an amendment of the'Organic Act tdnarrolw'
the PrOision'of technical services only to those relating directly to'
meas'dreinents and standuds. Since thi'Department and the Office of'
Maft'_agI'6ine'nt and Budget. should support direct funding for com-
petency building in any areas of measurements and standards de6iide'd
to be of high priority for NBS at a given time, this would insure
backing for competency building in both elements of the mission.
Although this actiou would clarify the role of NBS, and would provide a
central theme for all its work, whether develo*ental,, applied, or
serviole onented, it would also remove the possibility of using the;NBS
as tho home of "last resort" for technical that is not! addr6ssed
by the. other functional agencies. 'Congress has often een. concerned
that a piece of technical work should be done, and has assigned it to
NBS (ottht Secretary of Commerce) for lack of any other more likely
perfoie.mer. This was certainly the case with the large. and well-regarded
fire reseaxch o am at NBS. A corollary to this option would be for
Congress to Iso claxify whether, NBS technical support to industry
is to b61imited to provision of infrastructure in th6 form of measuTe-
ments, and standaras only, unless specifictilly directed by matdate. to
do otherwise.
.. A Ith6ugh the duality in mission and its unusual breadth have
caused difficulties for the Bureau, they do not 'necessarily have td be
regarded as handicaps. On the contrary, properly viewed by all con-
ce ned they can be sources of great strength for the Bureau. The
of measurement science and thei provision of applied
.==pport of the objectives of a variety of age:ncies can be
%syuArgistic-each contributing to excellence in the other. Both ele-
na!dots of the mission require the conduct of basic research, however,
if'excellenc6 is to be maintained. Evidence would, eem to indicate
th4t'the Bureau's and the Department's leadershiphave not been
in asserting the'importanw of both i1spects of the
MRSimia4du and in emphasizing the inherent synergisms. External
6bg6tV6ft comment that in certain years, the Btireau seems to repre-l'
sbfitItsW an applied researdh -organization,' m Other ye xs us, a.
btWt +6,search: institution, depending --,6n how the lesdersMp. seems to
mel; th6: wind, is, bldwhig. AlthougW some 6f the blarfte for- this niigh
well rest with attempts to please an indifferent arent agency-rthtr
result is some confusion among significafit-out9IJeris'W bo'how'-flie
31--800-78 4









stogtruhu h ureau that stf ebr udrtn o






tane anthe Buea' comtmn tt
As a..i..l.no e,...m.g...be ....ge ....tha..o...wa i n h c

............. ................... of m s i n m hNrfe te p r t o a l o l e
fos h aetaec owr oecoeywt ogesdrn h

devlop en ofaniiptd..isaiv.niit.e..hs..ldhlpt





119

autoam this organizational structure provides NBS puts it 'in an
en*WA position vis-a-vis most other national laboratories. Scientists
stwaiomeleirels of the laboratory, working under internal (11STRS1,)
funds ca* basically chart their own courses, subject to the NBS
inbersAlbudget and program planning and -review process, and ex-
tq=41.,review by the NBS visiting committee, the NAS evaluation
pasialwj i% of course, the scientific peers who judge their publica-
tiaw.:They typically do not have to be concerned that an administra-
t6rolsewhere. in DOC will second guess their technical judgment.
J 0M could: argue that this degree of autonomy, has been largely
r apem e for. the Bureau's strong esprit do corps and the excellence
of. its measurement-oriented research for, which it is justly famous.
.W admini a ve politics, however, there are some costs.
1-wp&rticular, it means tbat the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for
&akmceand. Technology, to whom the NBS Director reports, is the
Bureau's only oonstituent within DOC. With respect to the internal
DOC. competition for funds, the other DOC bureaus are rivals to
NBS ratbmr-thnn its dients. or allies. This is another way of s i
what vva noted. earlier-that the; NBS mission appears to be only
indirectly'related to the missions of the other units- of the Commerce
Department,. In? the absence of a strong external constituency, this
puts. the Bureau in a relatively weak budgetaxy position-the results.
of: which are discussed throughout this report.
. ..W:ith.respect to work NBS performs for other agencies, the situation
isiaomewha.t different. Approximately 43 percent of the NBS budget
i"erived.from stich sources. Program managers (or their functional
equivalents) in, the other agencies axe the sponsors and have-respon-
sibility1or these funds, while NBS scientists are the performers. Under
such circumstances, conflicts over level of management may arise when
NIBS scieatists and their non-NDS sponsors. disagree on how a par-
66uhwpiece of work is: to be earned out-Such confficts axe relatively
Me.,,. however. On the whole, relations between NBS performers and
theirother agency sponsors have been cordial and free of the kinds of
tensions "t axe said to plague other laboratories. It has been pointed
out, however, that NBS management has been strongly influential in
the design of other agency programs in order to Misure the integrity of
NBS-technical work. The small number of exceptions encountered
*eW Situations in whi h NBS scientists with considerable, technical
exp erience in an area found themselves reporting to nontechnical
P16 in a new or crisis-beset agency-for example,, the Federal
uerR, Administration (FEA) or the Consumer Product Safety
Wn on: WPSQ)
10a, mQre general sense, though, the level of management problem
dp s arise. It is mamifestiod in the policy dispute with OMB over the
lllfth- "Ioiv )ncept"-&. dispi4te that NBS people speak of with,
9dwe angish. The baisic issue is: To what extent should research
p erformed by NBS in support, of another agency be o=trolled and.
dimetedby thb.,spoigsdr,(the lead agengy), and tawho extent should'
th6l PWfM=,ng org Htion(NBS) W e t6,autonoipay to define the
dircktion, of, iti own work. Bince control. is wually mainio4ned..by those
withL:the.,fuxds,:.,,th6 issueboils down to a discussion of the mode of
funding.. The OMB position on this issue is that if NBS is to. work on,
say, qpvir qOAI prdblems even in the area of measurements and



























this crei
Bureau'
morale,

assigned&
giving t
times ti
long-rai
a spons
distingv
Bureau
becoxnii
identif-v


I.







Xa0dest fraction, of the fiscal year 1,971D NBS budget has been
Uptace"12 in a reserve for competency building. App rently, it is intended
I
A portion of the, budget will grow, in coming years eventually
Chi the levell of 15 Percent ofthe' otal NBS budget. This step
I P. NBS pursue literally defined studiesrelating to its other
4 r-k if approved in the congre.$siqiia.J appropriations process.
w, uwuAgedbythe NBS &dmi. 14ratian, it should do muchto
.Zevjag;e Conoarnabout.the lead agency-: problem. Amother approach
'Agress might encourage OMB to experiment with 'n lieu of
..W lfwA-agency notion is to provide f =.ding directly to NBS for any
, p' &ted. yvork with the stipulation that its responsiveness to the lead
agenpy. and: overall performance on the. work will be evaluated after a
peno& ?f: several years. Such evaluatign. would have to include the
,74W.WVeness. of NBS to deadlines andpriorities of theother agency.
t4ireat of having funds taken. vFay mIght be sufficientL to aC-
lconaDhSh OMB'S'.objectives. The Congess could also experiment with
4eap ti q language.which would specify that funds authorized to the
Bureau for a particular piece of work, could not be reassigned to any
qthap,, utive branch agency by the, OMB to fulfill its lead agency
_Mwlept. even if funneled back to NBS to Perforin the actual work.
L iv6ula allow co'ntrol- of the funds at: the Bureau.
.A the case.of service work.,requests by another Federal agency to
it would seem reasonable forihat agency to maintain control
ou-:U6, flunds. NBS could, how ever, institute a competency-building
tax o"uch work in its interagency,& greem nts in order to build its
ities-:to provide 'even better services in the future.
.*CIENTIFIC FREEDOMAND RESPONSIBILITY
ne [complex] issue is the degree to which individual scientists
6An be guided by their own perceptions I of organizational goals and
IJ national interest as opposed to the pereeplUons of their superiors.
T:ps reflected at the laboratory level, in the opportunity for re-
are groups to pursue new ideas. d raiise new possibilities of
analytical conclusions whether or notnthey run counter to agency
policy [there is also a related] situation which axises when
a 6 . 17 searcher for a laboratory] seeks to reveal valid information,
but, is prevented from doing so by admini trative superiors.7
i ,Perhaps the best known instance of bureaucratic conflict over an
im e of kientific f-ieedom and responsibility in recb-nt American history
invdIvc-d the National Bureau of Standards. As a part of its product
4Anting activities, tho Bureau, -in 1949--50, exammed the efficacy of a,
axiety of automobile battery additives, including one known as
A.D-X2.11, NB$ vegesxch had indicated that, AD-X2 possessed no,
spemal flierits, a finding the manufacturer vigorously dispyted. The
manufacturer was able to obtain other, apparently contxadictory test
results, and gained the interest of a mxftber of, Senators and Repre-
sentatives. The result was national pub4i city for the product, and the
&-fi-s- of V46 IM Director by th &6rbtarf of
the N. wp., soon reinstated,. aia, t4i 'J"
urw kiised by t e-
inci&Dt-eveutually died, down, tbe, ,, tkatb iy- a"We controversy
highlight6 & CoAtinuillig set of c' on Ior j BS an agenFy which
_t4 7
7 HOW TAUft A 'I T.
Thig (net0ght is Saiiuel A. 1,wokeni oel "The.,.,Nattery Additive
Controvwnw,., quiveAtty, AbL.-MnMisity bfAI1ba=u u4imaond G. Coebrane,
49me"Wres JEM Progrewt of the -XAtIppal S 18,11 (Wa blngton
_9 =04 d9" on.
U.S. Government Printink,00 011%66),-Pp. 48"87,Aft TA AV eftO

































and in hf
'The re(
incidents.
Baruch p(

,dispute N.
isin their


a'"National TAboatrte





ebo

.'The National Bureau of Standards is the grandfather of this
wantrVs national laboratories. When it was founded in 1901 the
iuthorirA staff complement totaled 14 positions. During the past
(:.0kee- U. "t'Irs of -a century, it has experienced ]periods of rapid growth
se V- k& periods of stagnation and decline in staff size. The past
has seen the Bureau's permanent full-time staff decrease by
!11*1-DCMt 100 to its present level of approximately 3,000. One would sus-
zational aging to occur under such conditions, and indeed
6vidente of it abounds.
lely felt JN13S staff members to be
Organizational of, ng is wi(
v6ry, serious ro em. It is reported by -AS officials that the averave
of the NB9 S..taff has increased by nearly one-half year per year for
past decade or so. This would conform to the pattern known to
";W ifi other Federal technoscien J I
ce agenices such as NASA wbich
liave experienced either ste dy state or declining staffing levels in
yews. At least paxt of the morale problem at NBS appears to
."be due to the staff remembering the "good old days," when they were
,Youn ger and when funds and jobs were more plentiful. Staff turnover
is lowand has been. quite low for the past few yeaxs. This may have
-stemmed from the relatively tight.job, market a few yeaxs back, when
sfiiftwere almost forced to stay on for lack of alternatives. This led to
'I"AlIq of 'the overall staff, and perhaps now the generally older staff
...'(average'We of the -professional staff is 44 years) is less apt tof:search
out new )Portunities.10 Whatever the case the fact rem that,
Telatively0liew people leave, and this meaus'there are relataiav"ely few
im ition a- Qable for hiring now staff members. One individual in
."INM reported that he oined NBS in 1969 and that his section has not
.-hired: a ne* P'ermanqm" staff member since he arrived.
Awmdver can lead to a variety of jproblems. For example,
ratio4al Academy Of Sciences evalgation panel for IAT notes
In -its 1,976 report, the lack of modern tra bib in materials science and
eo among professionals in the Center for Building Technology
1"dered Miteraction With counterparts ii IMR and, the report
phes;, 'has re. duce'd the effectiveness N 88 work on building
G iventhe. lon"t possibilitie for staff growth at 14BS (although
Me now slot am anticipated f6rfi cai yeaX 1910), as well'a s the low
... an.mover Of scientists n fti 6ers and the rio6ture of the civil service
Ytem, the staft'agmij prob appears, to be, a ther intractable one
Yrth6 Bureau, as it is elsewhere in Federal laboralofies. However,
tlrtain options might:: be available. Modifications in 6 01 AeMce
might all6vi4to the oblem some WAY A senior scientine
,,%;rVi6e Jr:eserving ten4e hts but 0 -1
of s ntists apao r;lf 1911oratori owmmigghtor dMeornee mobility
cie nation es step.
act, MidU4 t6 & A
In f 2.1abora ries'also faeekwith S1 it
ns, ro'Ay o' themow0rit of lab 6 't
eratio i o1i el from! 11n t to uni
Cpmaintain sclen-fificwd technical 'Oftality. D6 hi at f O A-
lized Vst m of terift appomtni6ts (fori say 3 fdZ'Vean Of
ntist would also facilit0e turnover. The NIH: focr:'examp e, uses a
d-ft6 0 Ira, its'Vififili. Th6s6 iidividiial.
kting D ol'offellov' .. to help maiiiiiiii
fuZcfed out: of the regularly appropriated bud&f lbutthe sloig'axe
totate& to, f .4test scim e need 'and in
areas Q.. gre i; Wt. 'It might'be
useful for -N o receive a s y allaili6rit f f appointments
20 See appendix Q







ful-tien paetos tafciig
o t' o suc ..... .... one .... th|xsigm caim h ue

,hs Iaiabe orbrnin i nw lod s t pstoco-alfel!w
program under. whic young scientits.spen.2.year.in..........a
thmueu iharlaie trciesipn pi yN S n
aloac fo supisad qimn.TepeecWf"hs
f1e l gl6 ecn fwo eva'h nto hi em otk

..... tun iy to wor wihbih on cetsswom bigwt

.t em fres id as an............lmsben eplrd t
.,Bueau The... Buea' -sinii!euainsilapast~eao

qut oatathg ult plcnsfrispsdcoa pon




2 5
N B S is c iu m t ly i m p le m e n t in g a r e o r g a n iz a t io n i t w o u ld
......... m d re m o n a b le t o w a it a n d s e e h o w it a ff e c t s p e r c e i v e d fl e x ib ility,
ra rta ugsigteueo te p ion-a thiiiiimi.
.,,As,& poitie pintinthehisor ofNBS'aproch o oga iiiiiiili
tiodo~i~iblity it mght b poited -ut tht th Bureu hasofte
been-m~in to dvestitsel of rogrms tht hae evoved o th
omt f beng to lage, r~sef~utainng. or eampliinthe arl
'eafths rdmace pogras wee reovedand ouse in seprat
lewaori~utid o N S.Cetan rasprttin-rintd c ie

Werpa~sQtxmsfered ito eparte uits andgeneal ervie.tetin

*wk or te GeeralServces dminstraion as taisfrredout
The ointhereis hat BS hs aways-maitaind willingness it
tae whtve sep ecssryt kepit enra msio fombi

overwhlmed, ven ifthe cst wasaishrikingiiiiiiiiiiiiierhap
ths trycol b cnidre s itlecedt nth bn we
staff imtaton ar ditrbutd y D C t is oertin u its iiiiunderiii
overall OM peronne ceiing uideines
PRESSURE ON BASIiRESEARC
'Thee ha bee a tendthroghou thescintifc comuniyii
r~ceit yars o suordiate ong-ange basc stdiesasiwlliaiex
ploraory nd fre-whelingappled rsearc nottiedioiclsely
deaid rjetstodmadsfo mmditesluios oprssn

proles nddeans fr ea-trmpaoff o ivetmnt i
RAD.Cominedwit theeffcts f fndin intabiitis, tis itu
Woninth oinonofsoe bsrvrs hs igifcatl wakne

oij iina bsi rserc efot n nmbr f res.Acorin
to~ths vie, notonlyhas i beeninjurous o morle an scietifi







ulate, They ar estv odfntos fwa osiue ai





m ipese7i 7 fi




teirm sreseai o for phi ie



or main ( wm e able"s in tppd pro
lowe rae o ie for to v i to
at e Commermensoba esear cat tha e Burau weddexlr
mte fu crefusely a na fe several oberaios

()Tecnrlpitthtbscresearch at NB has delie
uretie t ter Buea acivtis aper unenabe Th ddto




reseda or o thr aeiesp o
matisslsonecpbe oon ihwo w pk ls

oth ing staffan ...
toresure to metdalnsadshwrslsireatvl hr i

temasi eerhfrwihtere s o m eit Vsena lin

ioe prito prolea ti insmaas.TeCnrsO B

asd rhesa irch, nD eprmn hav imlcil antoedti



toded o lepnb iving teBra e ak without new- funds~
or eronlsosiso ec e.






(2 ueupronltn osea ftecnlc ewe ai




reerhadohratvte si twr e suadotngv
.... im rsin (hte inetoa ornt thttestain s





2 7


resarh. hi dos ot ea tat hecuren siuaionat .. isiiiiiii
no srius I desman hweer tatth uren stutin |n


assetios o "sockig gpsit critcalprolem," ad "naceptiiii
medoor%" ugt t beket i pespetie a reen maifetaisiiiii
of acontnuin conlict
M .11nl piion. a th Brea isessntall unnimus i e
flctpg eleftatbsi rsarhha ecindfrmit peioslee

and is errenly fr to low thee i realy n cler-cuibassifoide
termnin wha th appoprate eve ougt t be.It s eay eoug
W s~ "moe, butanswrs o th quetios, "ow mchioreian
that mch?" re notall sraightforwad. Whie weiavein
diret anwerseithr, fewguidline ar worh cosideing
-Zist"theabiityto ttrct ndretin iis rae sienist (tatiiiii
to ompte ffetivly or he estpeole iththetopratd u iiiii

tis, crtininusril abraores ad thr atonl abraoi

is ne bsisforjudingthelevl o qulit an th quntiy o baiii
reserch t te Bueau If op popl no ongr chose o cmeitith
13ur~uor f toseonthes~if ae lavig, hisis ne ndiati iiiiiit



p ol it lqiliiliiii
unroson ]Mptraegy fortheBureu ad is frend to e fllo i
ther 'i a isktha byinjrin theBurau' reutaion th dicusionsi
coul prete aselffulfllin prohecy









variety of new issiosadcins...[ionfomf eplyef.
.. . Th prpe mehais for reelymn-h cicmtne where

it works bes through laboratory trep

distinguish a change nlbmsinwihsre ainlproead
the existence of an oete ogani
The concerns discussed in Nt ora
head ings of "redeployment"~ ad "itegoverneta se"ar x
tremely important to NBS. Inf
different perspectives in sevrd
The Bureau does more work for ot
national laboratory. As noted earlier, some r4 t
acquid in this manner. In addition, the d
signed to NBS by congressional action re
the sense that they modify the labratory's mison.Thsinm y
ways the Bureau is a prtotypic p of the po
falls of redeployment and interagency use.
The mandated programs pose some peculiar difficulties.
one is struck by the extent to which Bureau personne semt ga
many of these programs as burdens to be borne rahr tha
trinities to be welcomed and exploited. There ma be somefeigta
certain of these mandates (for example, possiblthreyedolp-
gramn) are either not within the Bureau's msin o o eywl
suited to the Bfureau's capabilities, or both. Altog e-reual
to investigate either the formal or the inform
any of these programs, anticipated legislation is
edge for long periods before actual enactment.
congressional bill submission wo ow NBS to ke
reference might be made to the Bureau involvement. Br
prepared on each piece of l t
would describe the Bureau's capabilitieorialtesoprfmth
proposed task; the likely impact on other Bueauprgasanay
alternative mensfracmlsigtewr.Ocos, Bcud
not well anticipate any last-inute aendmn duigtefnlbl
passage that might call on the Burea' caaiiis
But in the other cases, ifNBS adLCwr okn adi
hand to insure that th~e Bueau's missionwr anandshsbe
suggested before then teDprmn ol tlz hs eiltv
analyses towd
alternatives wh
bilities. JIn fact, sevea rersnaivufo hepiaesetrmn
tioned that NBS is oten doingwrthtcudelbeonotse
the Gove ent.
the attention of the CogesbeoelgsainipsedifC grs

insure the quality ofreutticolbearnesmpyy low
ing NBS to contrcthwokotwhlmanannclsmnirng
Even with regadt h adtsta ose ob eeal
viewed as well ited
15 "National Laboratories Isuesh"ap. 18





29

problems-yroblems deriving primarily from the fact that they are
-iie", posed, without consideration of NBS internal-ly defined
prio es and without sufficient resources to cover their costs. The
allocation oftasks and the aRocation of resources, funds and personnel
sbis),:seem to proceed along different tracks, with differefit sets of
ac )r different priorities, and few interrelationships between them.
The e v' tasks are often burdensome because NBS is unable to carry
thein out without sacrificing p ,rt of its existing program. Since the
Bureau feels it cannot compromise on the quality of its work, it often
'handles the mandated programs by, as IMR director Jack Hoffman
'taking our lumps' on delays, -stretching its efforts out.
nywould argue that Congress should define the role for NBS, and
thaireo cring of priorities is called- for, if all programs cannot be met.
Thi'8 would not be denied, even by the Bureau. The difficulty is that
i
.NBS-'also has a charge to maintain its competences so that future
needg of the Nation, as expressed by congressional direotives, can be
inet.,P6rhaps a more cooperative approach in developing congressional
.13 initiatives might help the Bureau acquire resources com-
pgram
rhensurate with the scale of its new assignments and still maintain its
levd of expertise for future work.
00side of S'eafic mandates, the Bureau of course does a, large
amoant:of WoX for other Federal agencies, including HUD, DOE,
.DOD, EPA, and others. In this respect, the entrepreneurial spirit
I flourish s' in the Bureau. Motivation is clear and cuts across all levels
"of -the' Bureau. There simply are not sufficient appropriated funds
("STRS") to support the Bureau's entire personnel complement. The
system eems to work reasonably well in most respects. A few problems
arer discussed above in other sections of this paper. A number of others
'?ht be noted:
=Fl) Although the balance between STRS and other agency (OA)
funding does not look unreasonable in the Bureau as a whole, there
are some who believe that the ratio of STRS and OA funding 'in
certain parts of the Bureau is not good. This means that some divisions
are much more strongly dependent on OA funding than others. Some
apparently depend so heavily on OA money that they are forced to
pross the line into job shoppmi 'in order to support their personnel
lean years. The planneg reorganization seems likely to per-
petuate this situation, at least in the applied areas, since A is re orted
that the new National Engineering Laboratory wiU be funTed 70
pwwnt by 0A, while the new National Measurements laboratory will
only have 30 percent OA. The agreement on this topic is not unani-
Mous'.-however, since many think that the more service oriented,
a0plied side of the organization should have a preponderance of other
agency funds.
... .(2) There were a couple of complaints by working scientists that
Ahe, ueed.Ao balance budgets at the division level sometimes leads
division beads to shift STRS money away from people who had
sufficient OA support. This penalizes those who are successful at
-PAtracting outside money and seems likely to reduce entrepreneurial
(3) The problem of persennelslots was mentioned repeatedly..It
*pPears that NBS',W.Jility to take on desirable tasks for other agencies
mited by the availability of personnel slo
is R t& it might be noted that
&Hother Government laboratories, ancl even private sector performers,



















the


nere.


a year or two.
would require
NBS staff feel


wOri


becoming


to








Rem ng hatthre s sme aldit tothee oncrns on silllllll
aZt elm eln ta h ra esnsmgtreaemr toi orai-~~ii~
tiel ais n taiiosatNSthntosc rtonls NS ieiiiiii
otibwold ine Fdera agecies xistd lon befre te conractstat
sh~pe and t devloV is organization ultur and ode o

oprtinbfoecntat .wa iel ratcd.I oudb

neihe fesile orat lldesrale o urnNB ino n ami i ta iei~iiiiiii

oppto dvtdchel omoioig otat. nteote ad
shr o uh netrm, hr i oresn htNB anoin
ah~ nt'bode tsue fousdecntatos Prap iB

cou exmie te epeienes f the- cvi sevic lborto ies iiiiiii

wdug otside ontracors t perfom highqualiy techical wrk. I


was poited ou to us earlyreview of thi aperthat NH






decision to ocate in Cooado*d aymnbtntalo h uon




Gathersbhurg. Hoe, sm bevr hn ti osbeta nu

aver iwl whrFia n to e ow t fmvn th aoaois
m onenan i the ...a.
probl em d nt re m i 150






ontt e spe of the B~udeg Boplertio g-qalt ledrhia
imp r t e l mission not ....................
Gaisburg, a s
emphasiz the+ee+ to+++ treat+ +++++ Bouler.......rat la oraory
-\+it it+wnpioiyplnin rces wihmutnaualyitert
closely+ -w,++++:ih the isinoitpaetaec(nthsae B
G a++:+ith rs ur ) F a ....+i+++ + + :+!++++++++ i lure++++++ to++ allo thisi aut no m could+ lea to........... micro- +!++++ + !+i++i+
man ge en on++ the+i++ par of he dq a tes wit all its:+i derivaitivei+i !+! i++]++i+~i++: :+++++i++
p ro b le m s.+ + ++ +i.......................
I + does no emfo u neves hta xesv mutO
program conro had;+ benipsd nteBule esnnlb h
+BS maagmet to+ whc i usdt eot oeetepooe



Unvrst oflorado isrra i wi dlprie insd n

u s e fu+ l t o ................................................................



setig resourc aloain prga cordntin and. disii~~iiiiiii t ~ii
sting-esee cideraion iniii any assesmen of aabrtoy.h
labor tory' problems andiii iiii iiiiii++i ii++iiiii iiiii i t successesi+iiiiiiiiiii are~i oftenii~i trac abl quite~iiii +ii+ iiiii~iiii +=i++iiiiiii
........... to++i the deiio m k gsru tr ine alt th lbo try
I n th a t v eini it w as ap p a ren t fro m o u r in terv ie w s th a t th e P ro gramiiii ii ii=ii ii+i+:+ i +iiiiiiiiiii~iii iiiiiiii ~i~II II iiiiiii=11+iiIIIiiitiiiiiiiii~iiiii++iiiiiiiiiii.+i! 1ii i ii~iiiiiiii~ +i iiili+iiII~i+= i ii~ i =++i i++=+++ + ii,= i... + + ++=++ ....
ficeiii atiiii i NS ha acquire ai considerable amun ofii influence in, top.
level++ NBS ++iiom g an twsapaetta heewscn
sieal disaisacio though N ihit oe Gvnta
NB edrhpote a omk ifiutadncssrl noua
cho++P+++!ice based on thei reo m n ain of t .................. Offce it is
boudt eeaeciiim tde em oeeta h rga
Ofie ha ben.....pr.o.te......ain t BStanwol












3 3. i~lliiiiiii
P~t 2yr yeaX as well..itiis hardlyeasy iiimaitainiiistrogimanagemen
at tw4QPwkdr thse crcustanes.
Ja-~y as, te'dirctoshp~i nw prmaen an areogaiiiiiiiiii
tiw&:ndewa. -t emansto e ee"whthe te ladrsi il

no* tke.,stropg cntro, awhile staf~funtion wilibeieturedit
j et ~k adwhthrth eeutvebar wl fncin s i

m iii4iiiiii
uni t, sstth Die o m kig Im le en igiiiiii

Fuit ov~ht o thoBur eu. mght xamie wheheriventihav
mapove. o deradd te, eciionakig srucureat BS
CONCLUDINGiiiiiii
Th.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i s" oiiadsondiiiittinwhchhaiacd in

.........................................................................
NB:::::::::::::::::: dfiute fetcotnigteeinteBra'hisoisi............





34

of i clear that thr are ip u basic research atorder
th i oratry.u,i! itiiii~ should besipulate tathbic eeac

th It is l evre i insut o





Terefoee sitatioi ies o~t tesm s n sol o ecn

fu swih e iu sion s of eveldn ai rsac hruhuh
Nat onre i tee co







forB niesreflete sinteinraigiaityobulormnan
of basic r n .....................











le.I scer oeethat the rerBt alohs eposboiyt



is e uneway o iiitd


iby
T h i s ............ ................












A
..............................................................................-
racacefiinymybennebyscaprtiteponil
imato uuentoa ed a esgiiat h edaec
noinde o lo h ueu h a ionscn feclec



.. ..... ..... .. .. ... .. ....... ... .. ... .. .. ............... .......................... ..... .......................m e n t

needs i i uchi areas ~iiiiii suchi as energy, environment, ori heath o iiiate









......i Aiiiiii ii iii iii
PROSITR IEDiiiiFORiii HISiiiCASEii STUDYii~iii
.................................................... G A IT H E R S.................BU R Gii iiiii~ ~ ii
Ems Amblerii~~ii Acting Diretor
Howardiii Sorrows Asoit Diicto fori Program.
0anBneNgrmAaytfr iiigCm iteanEvltin Paes




JonHfmnIADrcor(iet Ds' eo M)

JonLos ietr etrfrFr' = N rco eineo E)



Bay~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ramr he ugtDv AscaeDrco eineeo Po
Bu ttn lle)
Doald = Pora naytIS
Zan iiihiiiiiii Ac in D ireiiiir iiii ii iiii
A r t h u r M c ou b r e y D i r e c t o r BS *
Jack Ruh himno h ietrsRsac dioyCmitte





36

NBS BOU










Axiniiiiiwx Biii


|iiYiRiiC||

'Ens@ mlr Cnimto ern ttmn, eoeteCm ite

Scinc an rnpratoUS ent Dcmer1,17)
Rexmn C.@ Cohae Maue frPors:AHstr fteNtoa
Bureau@ of Stnars (Wsigo:US oenen rnigOfc,16)
"Comerc EysNwIdsr .&D in, Scien an Goe netRpr

(Nov. 15 97,p.34
Gn aiKlt,'a ilBra fSadrs alFo rc, cec



































IDaasple







NATIONAL,..... BUREAU ,iiii OFii~iii STANDARDS................ iiiiiiiiiiiiH
STATE OFTHE BuREu ADDRES
ERNESTiiiii AMBLER) DIRECTOR..
Colegeso te aioa BreuofSanars tiii tethr
........................................ .................... ..................s
AcigDrco ndnwa ietr


Lastyea I ad t reortto yu o a iffiultyea. Byconrastis
...*tr hs ben moe saisfatory ThePresdents buget or isclya
1979requsts rom ongrss tebigestinces ................ We







On February 15, of this year, Mr. Stevenson's
oversight hearings on NBS. In opening the session
said:
We are here today to discuss the Nation's oldest national lal
figure out when the last oversight hearing in the Senate was he
to remedy this neglect. Our objective is a strong NBS that conti
to the scientific and technological capabilities of the United
At these hearings Jack Hoffman, John Lyons,
and I made detailed statements about NBS progr
directions. Mr. Stevenson asked over 40 question,
interest in NBS and his broad concern with the impa
technology upon the economy.
On April 6, a second session was held before thi
which time Dr. Baruch presented his views about N]
is headed. Dale Compton of our visiting committee,
also testified.
Dr. Baruch said:
NBS has long been a first-rate institution. Its staff is except
its management is competent, growing in strength and dedic
Together they continue to make valuable-indeed essential
our national well-being.
But we've been lucky, Mr. Chairman. We've been lucky
mortgaging the future of the Bureau. For many years, I have -w
change. As a member of its evaluation panels and as a colleagt
and frequent contact with the NBS management and staff.
that contact bordered on the continuous. What I have found
NBS has been stretched thin in recent years by a variety c
and the lack of commensurate resources. We have mortgal
avoiding investment in many areas of science and technology
become critical in the rapidly approaching future. We have
assignments albeit with varying degrees of satisfaction both b
Now, however, there is no slack left; no slack for developing
petence, no slack left for meeting new assignments and, most
left for applying the capabilities of the Bureau to the Katior
need for technological help in its industrial development. The
due. The President's budget request to the Congress addresses it
An unusual and most welcome appearance was
hearings by Congressman George Brown. In his
gressman Brown, a member of the House committee
sight of our programs, showed great interest in and si
Issues that he touched upon were the NJS missi
ships to other Federal laboratories and to industry,
our resources, the characteristics of our staff, and our
There have been many other congressional appea
staff during the year, as, follows:
Yakowitz, Resource Conservation and Recovery
Warshaw, National Energy Act; Davis, telecommu
LaFleur, Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act; H
materials interface; Cali, environmental monitoring
Fire Prevention Study Act; Lyons and Tipton, energ
Becker, recycled oil; and Hoffman, materials R. & D.
Also: Ambler, President's energy proposals; Ambl
sight; Ambler, confirmation; Ambler and Johnson,
Ambler, Lyons Hoffman, Thornton, Senate ove
House Appropriations; Ambler, Johnson, Senate N!
Passaglia and Kropschot, pipeline safety; and Amb
propriations.




41

Preparing for these hearings takes a great deal of time, but it is
time well spent. It gives us not only the opportunity to express our
concerns for NBS, but also a chance to explain the importance of our
ongoing program.
Kouse and Senate oversight committees decide in the future to
hold periodic authorization hearings for NBS, as a bill currently
drafted indicates, we will have a continuing opportunity to explain
the vital importance of our work to the Senate.
The past year has been important also in terms of national science
policy. President Carter is quite aware of the influence science and
technology have on national goals. He said In his State of the Union
message:
The health of American science and technology and the creation of new knowl-
edRe is important to our economic well-being, to our national security, to our ability
to help aolve pressing national problems in such areas as energy, environment,
health, and natural resources. I am recommending a program of real growth of sci-
eutific reseaxch and other steps that will strengthen the Nation's research centers
and. encourage a new surge of technological innovation by American industry.... I
am determiried to maintain our Nation's leadership role in science and technology.
That commitment is already reflected in the 079 Presidential
budget. Our assistant Secretary for Science and Technology, Jordan
Baruch, has done a tremendous job in gaining recognition and sup-
port for NBS. He has done this within the Department, with OMB,
with Frank Press, the President's Science Advisor, and with Congress.
We all should be proud and appreciative of his efforts.
A major theme increasingly reflected in statements by the adminis-
tration and Congress is the importance of technology to economic
growth. There is, of course, a strong connection between the two. The
overwhelming concern with technology over the past 10 years has been
with its adverse affects. Oil spills, air ]pollution, and airport noise have
been common topics; unfortunately, jobs, productivity, choice in the
marketplace, and standard of living have not received commensurate
attention up until now. But the pendulum is swinging, and more
balanced attention is being paid to the positive aspects of science
and technology. There are compelling reasons for this shift. Materials
shortages', energy costs, foreign competition, and other f actors pose
Major challenges to American industry. While solutions axe varied
and comA)lex, it is clear that technological innovation and diffusion
are vital ingredients in almo t every case. -
,Frank Press and Jordan Baruch are both convinced that this situ-
ation requires a much firmer appreciation of the Federal role than
now exists. They have proposed a governmentwide, interagency
study called "A Domestic Policy Review" to determine if there really
is a prblem in the.area of industrial innovation, and if so, what its
duinensions axe.
Jordan also feels that now partnerships between Government,
industry, and universities can lead to improved innovation in the
civilian industrial sector. On July 26, last year, many of you attended
the session in the Green Auditorium at which Jordan outlined his
Preliminary thinking on this subject. There has been a continuing
evolution of the concept called "Cooperative Technology", and I'd
like to give you a brief status report.

The obiective of the program is to cooperate with induAry and
academi'a in.the development of technology supportive of industry.











A

ject




A-Q

number of administrative problems, in retrospect I feel that it had
themundesimble effect of inhibiting Boulder from fully participating in
new programs coming to NBS which were generally assigmed to places
other than IBS. Now', in the new structure, Boulder programs are
reproented in both laboratories and several centers. I feel this is a
mnCu& -hedthier arrangement in that Boulder will better share. in
whatevei prosperity NBS enjoys.
, rI'*e alMded to budget matters several times. I would now like to
prwmt -the-, details of the fiscal year 1979 Presidential budget. This
budget whieh Con' Sis now reviewing, contains very encouraging
n6wa"for NBS.- Thwyear our congressional base is -$70.1 million. Next
year this base will be adjusted upwaxd by a not amount of $3,556
inft6ni This. i ,.made up of an increase of $5,575 million to cover such
At= as pay raises, increased utility costs and the like (in other words
8 pekent to cover inflation) and decreases of $2,019 million for non-
costs such as the money appropriated to modify building
re e e iff" pro
Alm in bass adj stments, there is a $1.6 million addition for the
,Had oiR program that amiuslizes the fiscal year 1978 supplemental
request for this program. Finally, there is a $20.963 million increment
fai technical pr gram expansion.
These dollar increases are accompanied by an STRS ceffing expan-
sioA- of 93 slots. This, cou led, with the other agency 'increase of 66
slots in, fiscal year 1978, =provide 159 new slots to help alleviate the
ekttemeipemnnel pressures we've been under for some years.
This slide shows a breakdown of the program. increases. (I have
already discussed cooperstivektechnology.j Whide they axe all impor-
tant, in the time avaRable this morning 1 shall only discuss two areas
in detail.
Thelargest increment is $13.4 million for ICST. This provides the
fi t
ILr6t..
-ye" incremen of .. funding for a comprehensive approach to
Broofm Act responsibilities of meeting the needs of the Federal agencies
f We e mputer information processing standards over the next 5 years.
NO is a massive responsibility, and one that will present a stimulat-
challenge to our management capabilities at NBS. The Federal
iavestmmt is over $ 10 billion each yeex for computers, their associated
soft0aro. iand. the: staff to run them. Despite the importance of the
task., and OUT continuing elforts over the years to obtam' adenuate
suppoi7t, the total funding for ICST this fiscal year is only $4.3 .
lbs low level of support has severely restricted our activities, and
has led -to: both GAO and eongressionid criticism of our output.
We txied a iiew strategy.in our ICST funding request for fiscal year
IM. Fiftt've put together a 5-year plan that presented a detafled,
cvmpreh6nsive approach to NBS activities in the standards area to
weet.Federal needs. In the future we shall he changing from a total
refiahtm'ou the voluntary standArds. system, where a concensus has
been.very hard to obtain. We plan to use a Federal users committee
to help us set priorities and then writestandards ourselvzs or on con-
tftct *ith the private sector, whenever it becomesclear that the volun-
tary stimdardization system'will n6t produce the standards we need
in the time frame we have specified. In our strategy we also took a
much mote a A ilaining in detail to the Detartment.
ggressive, ance in exp,
and to: OMB.Vhat we planned to:dO with these funds, and e conse-
quen,6* bf viot reedivmg them., Since OMB ha& both management and





44





45i
ionc~~~~iiidioivel~iiiiiiped,~~ii cnb ppidInufrmaloyufomtevisiigiiii
the valatin paels an theNBSScintiic Reseaxch
Cbmiadtte'will e: needd if weaxe.to ake thebest selection
nddto tlsest m'htth iuato oa i eyd fee
fro tat.w en N S lst~i te pprtuitytobuld w ich iiiioccurrediIiiiiii
rih.atrWrdWr1.Aihttm aynwaeso cec a
bee ope ed.p...........re t.opor uniie. T oday !!i most.................. of theiiiiii:
Intmsiag robemssee tometo ave a trog mltiisipliryi~
asattote. hrfoe h wyw g butcmetnebildn
Ingtwl vr ifrn ody nieyut hn b uthian
let ne ave ouropinons
*izipa sorc ofides wll ofcouse betheNBSscentfican
en m e m t f .F r s m i e I aveiiliiiiiiiii fe ililiiiiillihi n e f r a o u iniiii~iiiiiiiiiiii
-wih N9scetit ouddics terprjecsad dasWt m n
oterNB enormaaemnt n sietfi. ahe tanaprgrm
ri~vmw 'tmospher. At.firt.the.Prgram.Offce.took....t.is.ask,.an






46

must improve our percentages here. But there is a difficulty that)v*
must face squarely and honestly. There is a relativelymnall pool fimm
which to draw and competition to hire from that pool is intense.
Specifically in the national population in this category, 3.5 percent
are women, 1.1 percent are black and 0.7 percent are Hispanic. For
example, for the years 1974-75 out of about 10,000 graduate students
in physics, 120 were black and 30 were Hispanic.
We must find a way to help increase this flow and channel more of
it into NBS. Accordingly I am going to propose a budget initiative
for fiscal year 1980 that would allow NBS to pay for a full course of
graduate education in these fields. This would be available both to our
own people and to those who would commit themselves to work here
3 years for every I year of training. ,
These two items, program reviews and a budget initiative are ad-
ditions to our ongoing EEO programs.
Let me now turn to accomplishments -over the past year. I would
like to discuss a number of things that have come to my attention
that are noteworthy.
In the formation of photochemical smog the interaction of ozone
with olefins, such as ethylene and propylene, plays a central role.
This situation is illustrated in this slide taken from the November
1977, issue of Dimensions. Until recently none of the intermediates
have been identified 'n going to the final products, of which the
aldehydes and several suspected radicals are the bad actors.
The formation of formaldehyde was known, but the fate of the
peroxymethylene radical was thought to generate further radicals that
could form a chain reaction in generating more smog.
Suenram (pronounced Syrom) and Lovas have shown, using micro-
wave spectroscopy, that dioxirane is an essential intermediate. Ilis
molecule had been postulated theoretically but never observed.
Suenram and Lovas have proved its existence.
A parallel experiment by Martinez, Herron, and Ruie, (pronounced
Huey) using mass spectrometric techniques, have confirmed the exist-
ence of dioXI'Lrane and also shown the decomposition ratio to the final
products shown on the slide.
Thus the fate of the chain following the formation of the peroxy-
methylene radical 'is benign insofar as smog production is concerned.
This work has been picked by researchers at EPA to model this
facet of the ozone-olefin reaction. The new model, incorporating NBS
results, gives a greatly improved agreement over previous models
that contained hypothetical free radical chains.
Refractory metals such as Mo (molybdenum) are used as wall mate-
rials in magnetic fusion research devices such as Tokamaks, and thus
occur as impurities 'n these, plasan as. Radiation from the highly ionized
impurities is a major source of energy loss from the plasmas. Thermo-
nuclear bum will be, difficult, if not impossible, unless the amount of
these impurities is small and controlled. Control of the impurities relies
on spectroscopic diagnostics of these elements. Until recently the spec-
tra (and energy levels) of the high ionization states of theie elements
were not kriown.
Part of the difficulty has been that with spark source excitation
many states of ionization are produced with complex sectra. The
bottom two lines (which are actually for a silver spectrum) give you
an idea of the line density and consequent problem of analysis. Reader,





47'

Vffistaaxid Luthetha'Ve shown that, by varying the Ise length of
hif Power lasers, that controlling the rate at whic energy is. fed
Uto flo target, much Aater'selectivity can be obtained, as shown
ifilhe to.p line.
-1j'aingt this technique wid lasers at NBS, NRL and Los Alamos, these
Ooetltisiji have identified resonance lines of Mo+11 MO+30, and Mot"
42 bi tho 8oft X-ray range. The mportance of this work is twofold.
.,.Y*t it's an exciting new experimental technique that is applicable
la e number of ato Em. Second, it measures the spectra of atoms
*IkQse spectra, resemble one.electron type atoms. These simple spectra
.Ard'i di able for diagnosing fusion-type plasmas.
Durb* the past yeax the first in a family of peripheral interface
:otandar&s was developed by Tom Pyke's group in ICST. Such stand-
Axds are essential if 6m0uter mainframes or central processors manu-
Jsxtwod by one company are to be successfully interconnected to
,.. r ipheral equipment, such as magnetic disk and tape drives, manu-
ed b any other company.
sl3e, shows one of the four connectors used at this interface.
"I technicaJ specification of this interface itself includes the electrical
funedonal characteristics of the interface, so that manufacturers
Wld,: be able to build equipment to go on either side of the interface,
And, users will be able to have confidence in the results when this
.equipment is interconnected..
Through 'an iterative process involving public review of our first
proposed. Federal interface standard, ICST is now moving quickly
loWard what we expect to be a milestone in the Federal computer
f4andards.,Prowram.
W elA rulliger and Walls have demonstrated a way to cool
i held"' ns an electromagnetic trap. It had already been shown that
J66, sue]4 0 singly ionized magnesium, could be held for hours in such
P At room temperature. In order to reduce thefirst and second
ord-ef, Doppler shifts and reduce resonance linewidths it is -necessary
ool tKe ns. In the first successful experiments last month, Wine-
to"Led( 66'"o-16d1magnesium to a temperature of about 50 kelvins and be-
1jejeS h6 'can go much lower. The method is an ingenious one and
'dlation
rblibs on ra Tessure.
Imagine ion A, moving toward a I photon beam (top left-hand
c0 iieO -. TIte ion''will ba resonant at a frequendy H (PO--VD), less than
ffib mon4nt freqiiency in the ion's rest frame. An ion moving in the
It 0,
ame qlreeffoii as. the photon beam (top right-hand corner) will be
lobftesionapt with the photon beam because the Doppler shift is in the
e ,::_ .. . 0 .,
posi e aii,
OP t ection.
After absorption (bo.tton left-hand corner) the ion is slowed because
,dre6dih N subsequent hoton emission there is no pref arred direction,
that, the emitted rasiaiio'li can be anywhere within the Doppler
nloelople,.,# d the verage, will have energy HY0, the unghifted
reson4iii: energy.
f The i4et Offect, therefore, of irradiating the ions With a frequency
Jtl i "th'' the'rego-nant fiequency of the ion in its own rest
fr ine 'kin ic enerr
46toe rapt et and therefore cool'the ions.
iErnl Xjoimzle4 Nglaitie, I eenins, and 8auder have succeeded *in

7arna ri










Atthese X-ray energethBrganlisoyafaconfa
degree, so tooti etrta at ermlinacrcagl's
needed to~ be maue ooeoetosnt fascn cuay
which was atal oeb bann lsr n30,acnieal

already madeposiblethreoclainoexeinalydemned
energy levels in moi tm ihqatmeeto 1
tions. They hav lohle eslesaldsrpace ntepo


been ma~de tNS trigwt th Ccoctiesadranwok
ing u~p through h C ,C 4ad1 lses hnet h atc
spacing of licon and now up togamryso1. eelconlt

for cus tody transfer.Sic suhtasesaeoen ner toal
BS wa asedto verify the cuayo hs tbe o hpo

prismatic solids about 30 meters long, 0mtr ie n 5mtr

totalr niew techn iu deived fromterxpincin3D erogy
and measured several tanks in the firtsip

tisea solide with flat w all utisd h el ak h etcso
aris xnslid at m ared ongg lts iil tahe otetn

Thisfigr hows e deiains thebt fte akfo h
idel btto pane. Tese arete sdt opt cuaedf

ferences between the real andielsld.Snetedaloids
known accrately,~ the volume is as nw cuaey
The techique is unqei h iedo armtrl.I hr


a 3cr volume error of a few patin1410imsbtethnpvou
methods.


flctuonsand avrg conenrto r fidvda pce'wti




49

w ithin a stream of gas (methane oming from a
5-Millitifetei-diamotef tube, surrounded by air coming from a con-
baiifrie,'15-milli-rneter-diameter tube). Raman scattered light excited
W' th f oc'al 110int 'Of the laser (3 X 10-IMM3 in volume) was imaged
&Lfdl* Jhlif of a: Raman spectrometer, permitting detection of
9ected"iipecles.
The-tlt e dependence of the Raman intensity was analyzed by fast
Nu'lr"1"''ti ansform'ieebi iques to yield the fluctuation spectrum shown
in the next slide. The height of the central peak indicates the average
6nc6ti Ai6n. of cola. meffiane in. this case. The three spectra show
M 6e"iil "'Auctuation 'amplitude and freque'ney progressing from the
M4 cur,0260 the gieen as th,& gas flow was probed progressively down-
important potential application of this technique is the simul-
taneous measurement of the'fluctuation spectra of methane and
6* geii; for example. This *ould.allow determination of the efficiency
of.combustion in each' region of a flame. Similarly, fuel and nitrous
o'.xide"con'centration. fluctfidtions in a flame could be simultaneously
bbseAedl to assess pollutant formation rktes and dependence on
pyania Buehler (pronounced Bewler), and Smith have developed
9 unique Variable-t6hiperature silicon wafer probe shown on this slide.
I.f La ic the temperature from that of liquid nitropn to
'13y q raising" i
i-bom_ iiin erature, they can measure a sudden change in capacitance
of -each of the 100 or so devices on a single wafer. The capacitance
jump occurs when the trapped caxriers are thermally emitted from
defects, in this case gold atoms.
This slide shows the variation in gold concentration. The concen-
tration ranges from 0.4 parts per bi lion (lightest regions) to 1.6
parts per billion (darkest regions).
Now for fast transitors, such as are used for example, in computers
one needs high gold concentration for high speed, whereas for powers
thyristors. an- iiAermediate level of doping is required to obtain an
optimum design which balances speed against internal power dissi-
pation. Therefore, using this new technique an engineer is able to
tailor his design and subsequent processing to meet requirements
for aparticulax application.
This technique is one of a large number of tools for process control
that are being developed by the Electronic Devices Division. They
are being used by industry to improve productivity. As industry
is m= to very large scale integration and consequent complexity
Of In acture these tools will be increasingly indispensable.
I Those selected highlights, as always, reflect the widespre#Ld technical
excellence of NBS. It is particularly encouragmig.to me that work of
such quality was done during the past year, which was a period of
uncertainty and very tight resources.
Now that the situation gives promise of improving, and we are
receivin b & recognition and increased support, I look forward to
neven brighterr record of accomplishment. For examTle, the pro am
to rebuild competence will create new centers of exce ence through lout
NBS. The accomplishments of these groups will enhance our esteem
among peer groups and our reputation for responsiveness on the
part of the administration and Congress.











mens. ahe challenge e

nical complexity of the ak ewl aebt adt n eore

major' impact.,


designed to provide dire industry suppot exiedi y h




the citnge aoditte, copan Wtht r




you who will make itraiy






N::




:I ..........
........... ......










N A T IO N A L B U R E AU-', H ,,=,,' O Fii ,,,iii ,,,,,," ~ S T A N D A R DS ii!iii i iH ~ ii iiii ii ii' iii 'iii''! iii ii ii ~!iii = i!~iiiiii i iiiii ii iiiii !iiiiiiiiiii i~ iiiii~ i~ iiiiiii ='iii iii i ii ii~iiiiiii ii iiiiii i iiii =~iiiii
.. ....EO R GA N IZA T ...IO N '' ...... .. ! iiiiii iiiiii~iiii~ iii~~iii~~i i i:
EXPANAIO OF THEPRPOEDCHNG
.1 YU.. naur of ........ change iii~iii
Th~rqpse eognzain fth a ia Burea of Standards
co *o teflown aorcags:()Aoihn h insiutesii

(exce~~~~~.......... I ntth nsitt fr opuerScece adTehnlgy, 2


est ishig tw labratoies s maor lne cm onits f NB, (3
abolshin theOffie ofthe ssoiateDiretor or IformtionPro
grm,()cnsldtn hecnrla minsrtv n eh ialii~iii

syl~ortfuncion of BS romthre ino tw man coponnts

the Office.ofthe.AssociateDirector.for.rograms..Budgt,.and.Financ



1. d nforatio
audtheOficeof heDircto o Adinitrtiv a







11. Reasons for the change
A. Need to strengfthen and maintain m peec.Oeo eea
problems with the current organztionia 8Wd
ment of the proposed structure was a naifcoyblneo
emphasis between solving immedaetcnlgalpoemad
strengtheningadmitiigahgleeofsiniianegnerg
expertise in the organization as a resoucfoslvnprbe.A
gradual erosion of this co
a problem for
establish an orgazaionlsrcuedsgdtoteghnad
maintain core technical competence. The tolbrtre ne~h
new strutran th cetrreotn tote ar sinfia
importantrsosbltinodrfrte tocryottermso,















reunl y~~ |c
v te o d n
B. More tmelyresos to grinlned.U drth nttt







fuctos su nzta lomiuer hnti oeeti edd na
radeistrt ne athen cysrend wtutr ssmeie lwi
pintinst. The amnitratiofte oraiainlsrcueitw











icest ueaneogy aended o
edumpne betedion) m i f





& 0.... ,, iiiii
.................................t io n is.......................... d ......................""'iiiiiifi lt '' b e c u s o f. th la rg e~iiii~ii
................................................... o f!!!!!! s m a l...........to o n m n a e r

:'a Pmidng a rameork fr th cooperate tecnoloyiproram.
Ili- new.. Depa,,,men, of... Comerciciiirtivitehnoogyproram

Aen ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i approved wil ee dfie ogaiatonl tucur o cc
....................... increases in staffi ng and fundmi and to provide the
m~nari famwok o ary utte urossiiiheprgrm.Ths
ptqlpset, re toprovde fo innoativeapplcatios o tchnolgy t

inusrilitegoermntlan ntrntina ontiueces t po
videa fcus or oopratin a n hesecontittencesidevliii
ne nwegjrttp tcnlgadisiioa mca iisii
topooete eeomn o ehooie hr h piaesco
acigaln ano rwllntsrv seniltchooialnes
The proposed organizational structure for the National Center for,,,,,

CooeruiveTecnol isorinte toardthethre min onsiiii-
efte grops otlied Tyr te pogra: inustr, gvernentsian
intenstipnf Vups.Thestrctue wll tus e pogrmma ilii
alind. t' mamizeresonsienes to onsttut-neyneediwhrea
the aboatoiesaxestrctuall orinte moe twar axas f sien-i
tifcad egieerng omptecein eepngwit thir isinciiiiiiii
,-4asiQA. ~~... TheH tw et fstutue il onttteamarxmaa
syte with technicalicompetence as reouc alon onei ais...
prbe dniiaio n rbe ovngatvte ln hei

,o~rads ud foigitoteCntrfrCoprtv Tcnlg







resentatives were conutddrnthpannpocs.M-''







eNeBSi Stanard caried a eald edatcl ntepr .



twoul ocr Adiina butins a Stnadatceson eua

implemepentation.
eNolog usromt thaug ah visitngcmiteadebrso
mae Nyathena Asantyo cecs hs rop oti ersn$-







I iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
.. . . ... .. ... .. ..... . .............. ........ .............. : :::::::: : :::::::::::::: :::::::::::::: : : : :: : .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. i ii i i i
.......................................................... AFFAVIS]]]]iiiiiii=! Mi ............................................


..................................................................iiiiiiiii
.. iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
pu lo mm o

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii


C i mA mitPV

.......~~~ ~[~n Eiiiliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii,
Comm fm itiieimiiiii cu" env.
iiiiiii.,om ftmaho~
iii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiw ......................................................
: ~~~~-h~ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Tmow""''" i iii i
C40Wiiiiii t ...................................okiiiiiiiiiiiid"iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

















OFIE IEASCAEDRCO OFFICE OF TH ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR
FnnilM ngm n DiiinOff'ice of Stlandard Reference Data





SupplyiDivi ionl Offic of inentoa eain




Applie MahraisDvso nl trial eisr iviion Cene fo n sue o ut echn ologyOllv~i


Elfirel) iiso Poym r Diiso Ce e for BuligTcnlg o pue evcsDvso
Mechnic Diiso Mealug Diiso Cete lo ieRsachSsesadSotaeDvso
'Ha iim nrai i l Dvso lnlrsApkainCm ue ytm niern vio
Reato Rditin ivsin ndAnlyisDiisonInoratonTehnloy ivsi n





@ @ iii57

iiiiiiDUW&MAO
Aw O-
Of o|o
A.1ft
aboi~iiiiii~i~iiiiishedii~iiiiiiiiiiii~i
FORii W "iMAiiT*Niiiiiiil OGNAMSiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiii

oftf of. Swdwdt~siwn DIU~ii ~iiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiii
O k iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii& Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiii


Oi~mm~wwh kmm*
OiiiPi oiiiii kiolonabrall Siiiiiiiiiiiiigoiiiliiid$i

INTTUPNcmu

NgTKM NEASIECS ECE TIHOLG

srskam No SAWN* &Vbiim
www" Tuhmft owed*
RiiViiiirilil
MOCIATE


FMAOMMTATION DPNECTOROF ADMLZPMira
..k~ MmmB owo IFRAI N ~
AdM~hlF41ll@ Sii@










I VESTII LRD
312201849