Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

My name is Dan Mote, and I am president of the University of Maryland, College Park. I am speaking to you today as president of a university that is a member of the American Association of Universities (AAU) and is a preeminent institution that has built its reputation of distinguished achievement on the impact of its research. The University of Maryland's total externally-sponsored research and outreach activities topped $300 million in FY2001, and the University's average growth rate of research expenditures over last five years is 13.7%, the highest rate of increase for an AAU university. The latest NSF summary of R&D expenditures at all universities and colleges by science and engineering fields, for FY 2000 shows that in amount of R&D expenditures, the University of Maryland is among the top recipients. Maryland ranked #13 in total R&D expenditures in engineering; and #10 in federally financed R&D expenditures in the physical sciences. The University also receives grants from NASA, ranking #4 in university recipients nationwide in FY1999, with $38.5million in funds.

In 2001, ten junior faculty members in our A. James Clark School of Engineering and the College of Computer, Mathematical, and Physical Sciences received prestigious NSF Early Career Awards for Scientists and Engineers, placing us among the top public universities, just behind the University of Illinois and University of Michigan. The School of Engineering has an aggressive focus on undergraduate education and recently secured a $1M grant from the National Science Foundation to continue and enlarge its Maryland Engineering Research Internship Teams (MERIT) Program. It has received notification of an additional grant from NSF's Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) Program in the area of Molecular and Cellular Bioengineering.

The other AAU institutions, our country's leading research universities, receive significant numbers of research and education grants provided by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Many of you, too, can boast of outstanding institutions of higher learning in your district, for example, Syracuse University in Chairman Walsh's district.

I cannot overstate the importance to our nation's future prosperity of investment in basic scientific research and in the people who conduct this research. The innovation that flows from basic research has fueled the explosion of technological advancements in our lifetimes and is key to continuing progress. A study released last year by the prestigious Council On Competitiveness, which includes some of our nation's leading chief executives in industry and academia, called a greater commitment to innovation, particularly to federal investments in research and development funding, necessary "just to maintain the position of the United States, much less improve [it] in relative terms."

Innovation comes from basic research findings of the highest caliber in each field of science and technology and creates all new opportunities. Research in all the physical sciences is increasingly interdependent, and medical technologies such as magnetic resonance imagery, ultrasound, and genomic mapping could not have occurred without underlying knowledge in biology, physics, mathematics, computer sciences, chemistry and engineering. Significant future medical advances also require advances in the sciences. Industries, state governments, and federal laboratories are entering into partnerships with universities at a rate that multiplies daily because in a knowledge economy, our economic leadership depends on ideas we generate. University research is the primary source for these ideas.

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is the heart of the federal investment in basic scientific research. Since its founding in 1950, NSF has had an extraordinary impact on American scientific discovery and technological innovation. Despite its size, it is the only federal agency with responsibility for research and education in all major scientific and engineering fields.

At the University of Maryland, NSF funding has enabled us to make huge strides in our research capacity and undertake initiatives at the forefront of scientific research. We have strong research activities, for example, in nanotechnology, which tries to harness the motion of individual atoms in order to manipulate the properties of nano-structures, with enormous potential for medicine and technological development. NSF funds are also supporting research at Maryland that contributes to our understanding of the fundamental scientific phenomena of our planet and Universe, and our Astronomy Program NSF grant is helping us create the most powerful millimeter telescope in the northern hemisphere, which will be a premier instrument for the study of the origin of the stars and planetary systems. This is just the tip of the iceberg of major research initiatives by faculty who have received NSF funding.

NSF is the major supporter of basic research in the country and is also widely recognized for excellence in the management of federal funds. Approximately 95 percent of the agency's total budget directly supports the actual conduct of research and education, while less than five percent is spent on administration and management. NSF was the only agency in the entire federal government to receive a "green light" for Financial Management in a review by the Treasury Department, General Accounting Office and Office of Management and Budget, published in the Administration's FY 2003 budget request.

Two years ago, congressmen and senators from both parties, with the backing of many others, set an ambitious and appropriate goal: to double the budget of NSF from its funding level in FY 2000 ($3.9 billion) to approximately $8 billion by FY2005. This process began in the FY 2001 appropriation with an increase of $519 million, or 13.3 percent, over the FY 2000 level. Last year Congress provided an increase of $374 million, or 8.5 percent. We thank Chairman Walsh for playing a critical role in securing these increases; the university community is enormously grateful for this support. We believe it is critical to build on this strong start this year, and it is our hope that the FY 2003 appropriation will continue this investment in research in which the pay-offs are so high for the citizens of the country.

The Administration has requested $5.036 billion for NSF in the FY 2003 NSF budget request. The AAU recommends $5.508 billion, an increase of $718 million (or 15 percent) above the FY 2002 appropriation. We suggest that the additional funds, above the FY 2002 appropriation, should be devoted to achieving the following objectives.

Advance core programs for research and education. Presently, 13 percent of top- rated proposals to NSF are not funded because of inadequate resources. Our immediate appeal is for additional funding for these proposals that support an infrastructure of high quality research in universities throughout the country. The proposed increase of $220 million would enable more top-rated proposals and people to be funded and strengthen NSF's important education programs.

Continue supporting key initiatives. Nanotechnology; biocomplexity; information technology research; workforce development (including math and science partnerships); mathematics research; and social and behavioral sciences have all been identified as fields ripe for advances and keys to the nation's future. An increase of $220 million would drive progress in these critical areas.

Increase grant size and duration. The average NSF grant awarded in FY2001 was $93,000 and lasted for just under three years. By comparison, the average NIH grant in FY2000 was $338,000 and lasted for just over four years. Increasing the size and length of time of grants will enable highly rated researchers to concentrate on discovery rather than paperwork. Of the proposed increase, $135 million would be devoted to increasing grant size and duration.

Add funding for Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction and Major Research Instrumentation. Several proposals are pending for large-scale research resources that would provide benefits to the institution or region where the research project is located, and also to researchers throughout the United States and the world. An increase of $50 million to this program would hasten progress on these important capital projects. In FY 2001, the NSF Major Research Instrumentation program awarded $75 million, but many highly rated applications could not be funded. NSF could effectively award an additional $50 million for research instrumentation in FY 2003. If additional funds were made available, this equipment could be purchased from American vendors.

Assist with homeland security and anti-terrorism efforts. The terrorist acts of September 11 have greatly increased recognition of the role of science and engineering in homeland security. Working closely with other federal agencies, NSF can enhance support for groundbreaking research into a wide range of areas, including information security, detection of airborne hazards, improved building safety, psychological effects of terrorism, and wireless communications. Of the increase, $25 million would fund research related to the War on Terrorism.

Increase graduate student stipends. Providing competitive compensation to graduate students will attract more qualified Americans to science and engineering careers, thereby addressing long-term workforce needs. With an additional $23 million above the FY 2002 appropriation, NSF can increase these stipends from $21,500 per year in FY 2002 to $25,000 in FY 2003.

INTERNATIONAL TRAFFIC IN ARMS REGULATION (ITAR)

Universities engaged in space science research have been concerned over the past two years by Executive Branch and space contractors' interpretations of the International Traffic in Arms Regulation (ITAR) that place increasingly strict restrictions on unclassified, civilian research collaborations with foreign-born scientists. Science is an international activity, and space science has thrived through such collaborations, often encouraged by Congress. Although we recognize new security considerations since September 11, we believe that scientists carrying out unclassified research on civilian spacecraft should not pose a threat to national security.

In both the FY2001 and FY2002 conference reports, the VA-HUD-Independent Agencies Appropriations Subcommittees directed the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to work jointly with other government agencies, including the National Security Council, NASA, and the State Department, to issue clarification of ITAR that would allow continued university collaborations and personnel exchanges. The Interim Final Rule language appeared in the March 29 Federal Register, and the university community is currently digesting the rule that modifies ITAR and discussing to what extent this new language mitigates the impediments to conducting fundamental research at our institutions. We appreciate the Subcommittee's support in this area.

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

Since its inception, NASA has had a long history of productive collaboration with universities, supporting research that has given the United States the undisputed leadership role in the study of space and the earth's environment. University-based research, with important technological applications, has been supported through research grants, individual collaborations between faculty and NASA scientists, and formal partnerships between NASA centers and universities.

NASA-funded research at the University of Maryland is extraordinary. It includes individual major projects, such as the Deep Impact project that is planning to fire a 750 pound copper bullet into a comet to learn the primordial composition of the solar system. It also encompasses partnerships that expand the productivity of both partners. The Earth System Science Interdisciplinary Center (ESSIC), a joint endeavor between NASA-Goddard and the University of Maryland, focuses on understanding how the atmosphere, land, ocean, and biosphere components of the earth interact and the influence of human activities on these systems.

Future leadership by NASA, along with the benefits derived from NASA-funded research, is threatened by potential manpower shortages. Both the current and former NASA Administrators have publicly expressed concern about NASA's ability to attract and retain qualified scientists and engineers. Within the next five years, one third of NASA's workforce will be eligible for retirement. At the same time, the pipeline of space scientists and engineers is drying up. In some fields the problem is acute, with the major scientists all in their sixties coupled with low enrollments of graduate students to follow them. In other areas, there are major new initiatives to be undertaken and yet no certainty that the required educated workforce will be available. Unless there is an adequate workforce that is well trained, with imagination and vigor, the space program cannot succeed. The nation's security depends on an aggressive space program for surveillance and active defense, and economic impacts of space communications and remote sensing are large. We must not lose our lead in space research because we lack educated manpower.

The Administration has requested $8.918 billion for NASA's Science, Aeronautics and Technology (SA&T) account in FY2003. The AAU recommends $9.054 billion for these activities. The following items are of particular interest to research universities.

Space Science. AAU supports the Administration's request of $3.428 billion for the Office of Space Science (OSS). This represents a 19 percent increase over FY2002, although since $210 million of this is due to the transfer of the Deep Space Network to OSS, the net increase is 11.7 percent. Space science missions produce basic knowledge about our environment, the solar system, and the universe so we can understand better how to sustain and improve our world.

The most substantial proposed changes in NASA's budget concern planetary exploration and augur well for future solar system exploration. The Administration has proposed an unprecedented long-term plan for planetary science and exploration and for the first time in a decade provides a real, albeit small, increase in Research and Analysis funds. The request also maintains a vigorous program to explore Mars, adds a line (New Frontiers) for moderate-size missions, and supports the development of nuclear power and propulsion technologies to allow longer-lived landers and more capable space missions. The Explorer and Discovery programs, both of which have strong university components, would receive increases as well. The New Frontiers initiatives will be competitively selected and, according to current guidelines, restricted to missions concerned with origins and the outer solar system. We appreciate the focus on competitive selection but suggest that the scientific priorities established by the ongoing National Research Council planetary decadal survey guide selections. The development of nuclear capabilities should revolutionize the type of planetary missions that can be flown a decade hence. We are enthusiastic about this revitalization. Support of other technologies may also yield significant benefits to the planetary program. We note that these improvements, however, will not be available for a decade or more.

Biological and Physical Research. Last year, significant cost overruns were identified in the International Space Station (ISS), creating the need to scale-back some activities. However, in a report last November, the ISS Management and Cost Evaluation Task Force reaffirmed the importance of research as a primary rationale for the ISS and the indispensable role of the ISS life science centrifuge facility. The quality of the ISS research facilities is a crucial factor in determining the value of its scientific program. Over 100 flight investigations in the physical sciences and biomedical research wait their turn for access to on-orbit facilities. Although NASA emphasizes biomedical research associated with crew health maintenance, a large number of investigations address cutting-edge scientific problems with direct application to Earth-based technological, industrial, and health issues. Ground-based research is also essential for developing the knowledge and validating experimental approaches for spaceflight experiments. NASA currently funds about five ground-based investigations for each flight investigation, and hopes eventually to reach a ten-to-one ratio to guarantee that the highest quality research can be tested on a flight platform.

Last year NASA's Office of Biological and Physical Research (OBPR) received roughly 430 grant applications, over one-third of which were judged by peer review as top quality and worthy of funding. Due to budget constraints, fewer than one-fifth could be funded. Increased funding for OBPR would permit more grants to be funded at higher levels for longer periods of time. This, again, becomes an issue of getting top-rated work done and keeping top-rated people involved. AAU urges an increase of $100 million to enhance these opportunities. AAU also recommends that the National Space Biomedical Research Institute receive $25 million in FY2003, a $2.5 million increase over FY2002. These two augmentations would increase funding for OBPR to $953.8 million.

Earth Science. AAU urges that the Earth Science Enterprise (ESE) receive an increase equal to inflation. The Administration requested $1.64 billion, which is $14 million, or 0.9 percent below the FY2002 level. A 2 percent inflationary increase would be $29.5 million, raising the total for the office to $1.67 billion. ESE is deploying the Earth Observing System (EOS) that will provide a long-term data set required for the study of global climate change. Universities are also working with ESE to develop new instruments and smaller, more capable spacecraft. Increased funding would help achieve these goals.

Space Grant. The Space Grant College system, highly leveraged through matching funds, plays an important and successful role in workforce development through university programs and K-12 outreach. AAU urges Congress to fund this program at its authorized level of $28 million. The Administration requested $19.1 million for this program in FY2003, and Congress appropriated $24.1 million last year.

Competitive Merit Review. Finally, NASA's scientific achievements are due both to the hard work of agency and university scientists and to the agency's use of merit review for allocating research funding. We believe that NASA should continue to use merit review to allocate research funds, since this process has helped produce the discoveries and advances from which the nation has benefited. It works.

Thank you for your attention to these matters, and for the opportunity to provide this testimony.