Dr. April Schweighart, VCAT Chair, called to order the open session of the meeting at 10:00 a.m. She welcomed the new NIST director, Dr. William Jeffrey, and noted that he is the fifth person to serve as the NIST director or acting director during her six-year tenure on the VCAT. According to Dr. Schweighart, it is difficult for an organization to be led by so many directors and acting directors in such a short period of time and it is in NIST's best interest to have a NIST Director for an extended time period. She also thanked Hratch Semerjian and Rich Kayser for their leadership of NIST as acting director and acting deputy director, respectively, and for their support of the VCAT.

Dr. Jeffrey responded that he would like to be at NIST for a while since it is a great organization. He has been at NIST for just over a month and is just learning his way around technically and physically.
Dr. Jeffrey stated that safety is important at NIST and pointed out the emergency exits from the meeting room.

NIST Update and VCAT Agenda Review
Dr. William Jeffery, NIST Director

Dr. Jeffrey began his presentation by thanking the VCAT for helping NIST do its job better. He then reviewed the day's agenda that included an in-depth briefing on the U.S. Measurement System (USMS) from Rich Kayser with time for discussion, laboratory tours, a detailed update on the status of the Homeland Security Strategic Working Group, and the NIST response to the recommendations from last year's VCAT Annual Report.

The NIST Update covered recent staff changes at the Department of Commerce (DoC) and NIST; staff recognition; safety activities, data, and benchmarks; examples of accomplishments; strategic planning; and stakeholder outreach efforts.

The information below supplements Dr. Jeffrey's presentation.

o DoC Staff Changes - David Sampson, the new DoC Deputy Secretary, has worked at DoC for a long time and is familiar with NIST. NIST will continue to educate Dr. Sampson and Michelle O'Neill, the Acting Under Secretary for Technology, about NIST.
o NIST Staff Changes - Dr. Jeffrey thanked Richard Kayser for keeping NIST in good shape as acting deputy director.
o Staff Recognition - Dr. Jeffrey is impressed with the breath and depth of the NIST technical staff. NIST's world-class researchers continue to be recognized for their achievements as recipients of a significant number of external awards. This presentation includes a representative sample of these prestigious awards across Organizational Units (OUs).
o Safety :
o NIST's safety record has improved significantly over the past several years and could be further improved.
o A new method for counting lost work days was imposed by OSHA in January 2005. The increase in lost work days for all of NIST in 2005 is not as severe when compared to the number of lost work days calculated by the old method. Although the number of lost work days has increased with both calculations, there were a few incidents in 2005 that resulted in large numbers of lost work days. The top three cases totaled 220 work lost days and involved a police officer who slipped on ice in the early morning and dislocated his shoulder resulting in 60 lost work days, a computer scientist who tripped over carpet and fractured his hip resulting in 61 lost work days, and a carpenter's helper who strained his back resulting in 98 lost work days.
o As requested by the VCAT, NIST benchmarked its safety record against other government agencies and its peers at the Department of Energy (DoE) laboratories. This data indicates that NIST compares favorably in total case rate and lost work day rate with respect to these organizations.
o NIST has been involved in a number of activities to improve its safety record, including contracting out for new safety training classes based on courses suggested by the NIST Safety Council and the NIST Safety Office. In addition, the Personal Protective Equipment Policy has been finalized, safety plans and hazard assessments are being updated, and the Environmental Management System Awareness training is available on-line.
o Accomplishments - These are highlights of NIST's technical successes.
o Measurement Science: Researchers in the Chemical Sciences and Technology Laboratory have developed an improved x-ray detector that could pave the way to a new generation of wide-range, high-resolution trace chemical analysis instruments. Researchers in the Manufacturing Engineering Laboratory recently developed a new infrared tool that measures differences in thickness across a silicon wafer that will help speed up their processing time.
o Standards: Researchers in the Physics Laboratory have used a new tandem technique to accurately sense the higher-frequency vibrations of a single aluminum ion that may lead to better atomic clocks. In addition, NIST recently developed a Guide for the Selection of Biological Agent Detection Equipment for Emergency First Responders. Produced for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), this guide provides the community with ways to compare and contrast commercially available biological detection equipment that best meets their needs. For example, first responders will be able to improve their ability to detect the anthrax bacteria and other toxic biological agents.
o Technology: In an advance for nanoscale electronics, researchers in the Electrical Engineering and Electronics Laboratory have demonstatred a new design for silicon nanowire transistors that both simplifies processing and allows the devices to be switched on and off automatically. This research overcame serious technical issues regarding the use of silicon nanowire devices and offers new and exciting prospects for their use in integrated nanoscale electronics. Staff at JILA, a joint institute of NIST and the University of Colorado at Boulder, have developed a method for studying how individual units of ribonucleic acid (RNA) dock or lightly and temporarily bond to form special three-dimensional shapes that may help in the discovery of new drugs. Researchers from the Materials Science and Engineering Laboratory with collaborators from the University of Kentucky and Michigan State University reported a significant step toward sorting out the carbon nanotube problem to help exploit new polymer composite materials of exceptional strength. A better understanding of factors that promote self-sorting will help improve the manufacturing processes of polymer composites needed by industry.
o Baldrige Award Ceremony - Dr. Jeffrey enjoyed attending the recent Baldrige Award ceremony in which Vice President Cheney participated. He noted that the ceremony was filled with groups of cheering people and encouraged the members to attend at least one ceremony in the future. The four 2004 Baldrige Award recipients were selected from among 60 applicants. All four recipients were evaluated rigorously by an independent board of examiners in seven areas: leadership; strategic planning; customer and market focus; measurement, analysis, and knowledge management; human resource focus; process management; and results. The evaluation process included about 1,000 hours of review and an on-site visit by teams of examiners to clarify questions and verify information in the applications. This program is an amazing example of how the government and volunteers from the private sector can interact successfully.
o Advanced Technology Program (ATP) - A retrospective survey of 27 ATP projects highlights the returns to companies and the social rates of returns.
o Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) - MEP's support of improvements in manufacturing supply chains is an example of how NIST can foster efficient transactions in the marketplace by providing standards and supporting technical information to industry. The Wisconsin MEP Original Equipment Manufacturer Supplier Development Consortium is committed to improving the quality of the existing supply base in Wisconsin and appears to be a success in progress. MEP also is examining how to help small manufacturers in the gulf region.
o Strategic Planning - NIST is working to sharpen its mission and goals to help establish priorities. A review of core competencies will help ensure that these unique areas remain healthy through adequate funding. The Strategic Working Groups (SWGs) are exploring options for investment strategies. NIST is undertaking a policy review of its strategic partnerships to make sure that these partnerships are established in the most effective manner. The USMS will examine the measurement needs of the future and the appropriate roles for NIST, academia, industry, and other government entities.
o Biosystems & Health SWG - This SWG has been very busy working with stakeholders in industry and other agencies to come up with the USMS workshop idea in bioimaging, to explore how to move forward, and to articulate why this area is important for NIST. Three areas have been recommended for future growth: bioimaging, nanobiosensing, and systems biology. To keep track of the USMS activities in bio and health, members of this SWG have been assigned as representatives to each of the eight USMS approved workshop efforts.
o Nanotechnology SWG - Nanotechnology is an important national priority with the White House leading the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). NIST is one of the 11 federal agencies and departments that is heavily involved in this effort through the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC). Clayton Teague, a detailee from NIST, is the Director of the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office. This SWG is preparing a gap analysis with options for Dr. Jeffrey's consideration that will identify where NIST needs to improve its skills and resources in nanotechnology research. NIST is seeking a world-class expert in nanofabrication to help increase its efforts in this area.
o Competence - Dr. Jeffrey had the pleasure of seeing the competence process when he first came on board at NIST. He was impressed with the absolute technical quality and professionalism of the competence proposal briefings. The labs submitted 21 proposals for five-year competence funding in which six were selected for funding in FY 2006. The metrics for selecting these projects were based on the technical idea and initial thinking of where NIST should be heading in the future. NIST plans to formalize the competence process as part of the strategic planning process and request that proposals be developed based on a gap analysis of core competencies.
o Outreach - When the CFO of Boeing's Phantom Works visited NIST, the Program Office compiled a 21-page list of NIST activities related to Boeing and the aerospace industry. This list was an eye opener for the CFO who was only aware of two of these activities. NIST is beginning to target those companies where it can be of most help.
o Administration Interactions - Deputy Sampson toured NIST for half a day. Andrea Petro visited NIST and is quickly learning about the Institute. Al Frink was impressed with his full day visit at NIST where he learned how the Institute supports manufacturing. This visit resulted in a good relationship between him and Dale Hall, the Director of the Manufacturing Engineering Laboratory and acting chair of the Manufacturing R&D Interagency Working Group (IWG). Mr. Frink also chairs the Interagency Working Group on Manufacturing and has some good ideas about MEP and an agenda for how NIST can contribute to the manufacturing needs of the United States. He has requested that NIST detail a person to work in his office. Dr. Marburger, a strong supporter of NIST, also visited NIST.
o Capitol Hill Interactions - NIST's Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs is doing an outstanding job in facilitating NIST interactions with Congressional staff and members of Congress. Dr. Jeffrey has visited about ten Senators, ten House members, and many staff members. He plans to meet with about six more House members this week to make sure that they understand NIST's mission and functions.
o Thanks to the VCAT - Dr. Jeffrey expressed his appreciation to the VCAT members for taking time out of their busy schedules to serve on the Committee. He recognized that the Committee is heavily comprised of individuals from industry with expertise in areas that can help NIST.

Discussion:

o Safety of Nanoparticles - A VCAT member discussed the need for NIST to be involved in the safety of nanoparticles, a growing level of concern. NIST is planning to address the measurement science in support of this area as one of its competence projects. The NNI also highlighted the understanding of the biological impact of nanoparticles as a top priority and the National Academy of Sciences also has begun a study in this area.
o Sustainability - A VCAT member indicated that the area of sustainability, with more than 10 definitions, is a potential flag and wondered if there was a role for NIST's measurements in this area. Some industry associations are trying to define sustainability and NIST is encouraged to think about this issue in the context of business liability in the future.
o Safety Data - A VCAT member questioned the comparability of NIST data to other agencies and questioned why the NIST data was so favorable. NIST responded that the data from all of the other agencies was derived from OSHA's database that should have consistent metrics. The comparison data with DoE was derived from DoE's Injury and Illness Experience Report and should be consistent with NIST's calculations. NIST does not have the insight to explain why their data is better. Perhaps a more detailed comparison with other agencies is needed.
o NIST Role in Hurricane Katrina - NIST has been tracking its activities related to Hurricane Katrina and provided some examples. Researchers from the Building and Fire Research Laboratory have been in contact with the Federal Emergency Management Agency and a NIST roofing expert has been deployed to join a team to study the field performance of the roofing structures. The MEP has been in contact with their Centers in the affected area to determine their high priority needs and identify ways in which the MEP Network can provide assistance. NIST has authority to carry out specific activities related to the investigations of building failures.
o Disaster Recovery - A VCAT member expressed the need for a pilot study of how businesses can recover after an emergency which could be led by the Chicago MEP. NIST agreed that this was an important topic and identified a contact to follow-up on this idea.

Roadmapping America's Measurement Needs for a Stronger Innovation Infrastructure: An Update
Dr. Rich Kayser, Acting Director, Materials Science and Engineering Laboratory

Dr. Kayser provided a handout on roadmapping the nation's measurement needs that covered some of the information that he provided in past presentations to the VCAT. His presentation focused on events since the June 2005 VCAT meeting and future activities. He briefly reviewed the outline of the USMS Roadmap report, recent developments on the direction of the USMS, the path forward, the template for data collection, the types of measurement needs to be assessed, and the sectors under consideration. This roadmapping will be a "mega" strategic effort that will involve assessing the measurement needs of the nation, developing a plan that responds to the needs, identifying the gaps, understanding the consequences of not addressing the gaps via economic studies, and reporting on the state of the USMS to customers and stakeholders, including the Administration and Congress. NIST developed a new path forward for the USMS since the last VCAT meeting based on guidance from the new NIST director and discussions with the Senior Management Board (SMB).

The information below supplements Dr. Kayser's presentation.

o Outline of USMS Roadmap Report - The Roadmap report will focus on identifying the crucial measurement-related needs of the nation and include a plan for NIST and other organizations to address these needs.
o Recent Developments - After learning of President Bush's intent to nominate Dr. Jeffrey as the NIST director, Dr. Kayser decided to put the USMS effort on hold until he could have a discussion with him about the NIST commitment in this area. Dr. Jeffrey suggested that this effort be decreased and carried out within the current organizational structure, with current resources, and in a way that leverages the extensive knowledge and expertise of the NIST staff. Based on discussions with the SMB about this guidance, Dr. Kayser developed a proposal to help move the USMS forward that the SMB approved at their meeting last week. The new path forward includes defining a template for data collection, performing in-depth assessments for an initial set of 3-5 sectors, continue to conduct focused technical workshops, review existing roadmaps and workshop reports, carry out certain key functions centrally, and adhere to the original timetable. The ultimate goal is to assess the measurements needed to support the entire U.S. economy both public and private sectors; but since this cannot be done at one time, NIST will focus on an initial set of sectors to begin the effort and then learn from this experience before proceeding to the next set of sectors.
o Template - The template for the data collection will consist of six high-level questions that correspond to the five-layer conceptual model that was described to the VCAT at the June 2005 meeting. NIST has various ways to analyze this information.
o Types of Measurement Need - There are three different types of measurement-related needs, mostly infrastructural, that will be addressed. NIST core competencies can help provide new or improved measurement capabilities. NIST standard test methods can help provide new or improved measurement-related services and support. NIST is a key node in the network for facilitating changes in the structure or operation of the USMS itself. No other organization is taking the responsibility for looking at the USMS as an entity.
o Sectors - The term "something" represents those areas that are too large to address at one time and are not really sectors. For these areas, a focused subsector needs to be identified, for example, the bio area may have a bioimaging subsector that is well-defined enough for understanding the measurement needs. The environment sector may need to be narrowed down, as well. Each of the sectors under consideration should be led by one full-time person who would be empowered to form a team of other knowledgeable people with responsibility for producing the section of the roadmap for the particular sector. This process will leverage NIST knowledge and expertise as the OUs identify the most critical measurement needs in a particular sector by using their contacts in other organizations. The teams may need to organize high-level meetings to identify the most important issues and hold more focused workshops to drill down and identify the most important measurement areas. Outsiders from related sectors should then be asked to participate in these activities. For example, measurement needs for DNA diagnostics could include representatives from the law enforcement area as well as the food and healthcare industries.
o Roadmaps and Workshop Reports - There are currently 13 USMS workshops in various stages. The results from these workshops will feed into the knowledge management system at NIST. NIST may proactively decide to hold workshops in other areas as a prelude to launching more in-depth analysis of measurement needs in other sectors. More than 300 documents containing existing roadmaps and workshop reports that cut across multiple sectors are already in the USMS database and need to be reviewed. This review requires a leader who can help make sure that the infrastructure is in place to work with other organizations and that a knowledge management system can be designed to analyze the needs within and across sectors.
o Timetable -The first assessment is planned for July 2006 followed by the very challenging task of developing the NIST response by December 2006 and reporting to customers and stakeholders in January 2007. This data could then feed into the FY 2009 budget considerations.

Discussion:

o Industry sectors will be defined based on the NAICs codes.
o NIST plans to complete the assessment for 3-5 of the initial set of sectors by July 2006.
o A VCAT member suggested that energy be added as a sector.
o Pharmaceutical Measurement Needs - Another VCAT member raised the issue of the importance of assessing the measurement needs for the pharmaceutical industry and the value of discussing these needs with biologists as well as physicists. NIST responded that its goal is to understand all of the measurement issues facing the nation and to identify the issues independent of NIST core competencies. Once the needs have been identified, NIST would examine those that fall within its mission for use in the strategic planning process. NIST is very cognizant of the NIH role in the bio and pharmaceutical area and will not duplicate their efforts but instead address those measurement issues that are synergistic. The VCAT member agreed with the importance of this synergy. It was noted that NIH has already requested help in providing quality assurance for one of their programs. NIST can respond to some of these needs immediately while other needs will be addressed over the next few years. In addition, individuals from various technical disciplines outside of NIST are expected to participate in the workshops to understand the full range of measurement needs in a given area.
o Information Technology (IT) Needs - A VCAT member spoke of the importance of information technology to homeland security and stressed that this area is a measurement challenge and opportunity. NIST's core competencies in IT, such as cryptography, should be expanded. Industry needs IT standards in the cyber world and other IT standards for information sharing as a transactional efficiency. Dr. Kayser noted that there are several other measurement needs related to homeland security, such as the performance-based standards for devices and instruments used in the field by first responders.
o Global Economy - The measurements needs in support of those industries that are having difficulty with product acceptance overseas was discussed. These needs will likely be identified by the customers during the in-depth analysis. Dr. Kayser may consider developing a subsidiary list of questions for those sectors that may have issues regarding the sale of their products overseas. How to address the identity issue related to doing business overseas also was discussed. Again, Dr. Kayser noted that NIST should ask the customer about these needs. Dr. Semerjian will be working with Technology Services to help formulate the questions to identify the measurement issues that companies face in the international arena. Dr. Semerjian noted that he had just returned from China and Korea where a working group was formed to identify issues where NIST can help.
o Template - The "when" is inherent in the questions. NIST may want to consider gathering information on the size of the industry sector. Another VCAT member noted the challenge in determining the importance of the measurement need and suggested that criteria be applied to assess this factor.
o Economic Studies - Another discussion topic was the need for economic studies as a way to help determine important and relevant areas in 2008 as NIST begins to develop the FY 2008 budget. A VCAT member stated that although the Committee has had presentations on NIST's economic studies, NIST has not articulated the importance of these studies to the USMS process.
o Sustainability and the Environment -The importance of identifying measurement needs in support of the environment for a host of industries was discussed. Dr. Semerjian noted that the recycling of hazardous materials and Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are issues for U.S. companies in the global economy. These issues must be included in the information gathering phase in order to make an impact in the future.
o Metrics - A VCAT member asked about NIST's plans to develop short-term goals to demonstrate success of the USMS effort. NIST is working hard to define the deliverables for the different tracks and anticipates that this task will be completed by the next VCAT meeting.

Laboratory Tours

Large Fire Metrology Laboratory - Dr. James Hill provided an overview of NIST's world-class large fire laboratory that is used to improve fire metrology capabilities for the country, conduct model validation/verification tests in intermediate and large-scale settings, and to set standards for fire testing. This laboratory is equipped with three separate calorimeters that provide accurate heat release calorimetry measurements essential to understanding and characterizing fire behavior. The Committee then witnessed a test of a residential bed mattress under the 3 megawatt calorimeter, as described by Dr. Thomas Ohlemiller of the Materials and Products Group, Fire Research Division. Bed fires in homes cost the nation nearly 500 lives, over 2000 serious injuries, and $250 million in property loss every year. Safety standards now adopted by the California Bureau of Home Furnishings (CBHF) are based on the testing methods and hazard analysis developed in this laboratory. NIST is now working with the Consumer Product Safety Commission who is considering adopting a modified version of these standards, which is estimated to cut national losses from bed fires in half.

Weapons and Protective Systems for Law Enforcement - Kirk Rice, Program Manager of the Office of Law Enforcement Standards (OLES), summarized OLES's past and present technical support and research for National Institute of Justice (NIJ) standards for ballistic-resistant body armor (bullet-resistant vests), which OLES first developed for NIJ in 1972. The body armor program is part of NIJ's successful Law Enforcement and Corrections Standards and Testing Program, through which companies may have their products voluntarily certified as compliant with the standard. The Committee witnessed a body armor ballistic test. Ballistic-resistant body armor has been credited with saving more than 2,500 lives, and the program's evaluations of new materials and ballistic threats and its revisions of the standard help ensure the continued effectiveness of this technology. This project area also develops and supports other equipment performance standards vital to the safety of law enforcement and corrections personnel, including stab-resistant body armor, ballistic helmets, riot helmets and face shields, bomb suits, metallic handcuffs, and firearms.

Homeland Security: Implementation of the NIST Strategic Plan
Dr. James Hill, Director, NIST Building Fire and Research Laboratory (BFRL)

Dr. Jeffrey set the context for the next three presentations. In December 2004, Ms. Kathleen Higgins' presentation to the VCAT on the Homeland Security SWG raised questions about NIST's implementation of the Strategic Plan. To address these concerns, Dr. Hill will briefly summarize NIST's homeland security strategy; Dr. Coursey, Standards Executive in DHS, will speak about customer expectations for NIST activities in homeland security; and Ms. Higgins, chair of the Homeland Security SWG, will describe NIST's accomplishments in homeland security over the past nine months.

Dr. Hill's presentation included a brief overview of the critical mission areas and initiatives in the national strategy for homeland security, NIST's vision and mission statement in homeland security, NIST's priority setting process, NIST's $68 million investment in homeland security areas, NIST's performance metrics for homeland security, and NIST's accomplishments noted in an OSTP homeland security report. His presentation emphasized the important role for NIST's expertise in homeland security.

The information below supplements Dr. Hill's presentation.

o National Strategy for Homeland Security - This report was prepared by the Office of Homeland Security in 2002 and is still guiding the country's activities. The first three mission areas are aimed at preventing terrorists attacks, the next two are aimed at reducing the nation's vulnerabilities, and the last area is focused on disaster recovery efforts. The report also identified 43 initiatives that should be undertaken in each of these areas as well as a list of initiatives for Science and Technology, including applying biometric technology to identification devices. There is a very important role for NIST's expertise in many of these areas.
o NIST Vision and Mission - Homeland security was identified as a Strategic Focus Area (SFA) in the NIST 2010 Strategic Plan.
o Setting Priorities - Last December, the VCAT asked how NIST sets priorities across SFAs. Currently, priority setting is done within the OUs with cross-OU collaboration enhanced by SWGs. For example, shortly after 9/11, BFRL identified technical issues related to this disaster and the long-term research that was needed to address these issues and reached out to the Materials Science and Engineering Laboratory (MSEL) and the Information Technology Laboratory (ITL) for their help. One year later, Congress provided funding to enhance this effort and NIST has currently $5 million to address technical issues, such as those related to critical infrastructure, progressive collapse, and security. The priority setting process will change in the future as the OUs strategically focus on NIST critical areas and make decisions based on funding, facilities, and competencies.
o FY 2005 NIST Laboratory Investments - The $68 million investment of NIST appropriated laboratory funds in homeland security is a significant percentage of the NIST budget. NIST has been investing in homeland security activities prior to 9/11, such as computer security. Since 9/11, most of the OUs have redefined and refocused their activities with more attention to homeland security, and in some cases, have received Congressional funding in these areas. With the exception of the work related to security of NIST assets in the time and frequency division, all of the homeland security programs involve more than one OU. NIST's activities in cybersecurity respond to legislation dating back to the 1980's and more recent presidential directives and involve ITL as well as other laboratories. The Physics Laboratory and the Chemical Sciences and Technology Laboratory (CSTL) are mostly involved in chemical, biological, radiological/nuclear and explosive (CBRNE) standards. The Electronics and Electrical Engineering Laboratory (EEEL) and OLES are mostly involved in the first responder standards with some work in BFRL. Identification standards related to biometrics are mostly carried out in ITL while CSTL focuses on the standards related to DNA. Building safety standards are a primary focus of BFRL with some support from MSEL.
o Performance Metrics - In response to the VCAT's suggestion that NIST should establish performance metrics for each SWG, the Homeland Security SWG developed seven metrics to assess NIST's progress in meeting homeland security needs. More details on these metrics will be provided in Ms. Higgins' presentation.
o NIST Accomplishments - In April 2005, OSTP published Science and Technology: A Foundation for Homeland Security that cited accomplishments over the past three years, including five accomplishments from NIST.

DHS Standards Portfolio
Dr. Bert Coursey, Portfolio Manager for Standards and Standards Executive, Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

Dr. Coursey last spoke to the VCAT on healthcare in Boulder on 9/11 and thought that it was the most important presentation of his career. Shortly after that, he became involved in the mail irradiation research and then was detailed to DHS with responsibility for all standards with homeland security applications which involve 22 separate government agencies.

The standards portfolio process requires performance standards that lead downstream to testing protocols and certification processes. Most regulatory standards are promulgated by agencies that have statutory authority to protect people and the environment. Sometimes other standards, such as physical measurement standards, are needed. DHS lacks the authority to issue standards except in limited legacy programs; however, it leverages its expertise and resources from its partners at NIST and in the private sector via the American National Standards Association (ANSI) to develop voluntary consensus standards. Both DHS and NIST have important roles to play with other agencies in support of highly visible interagency issues, cross-cutting issues within DHS, and infrastructural support for standards for components. NIST is a strategic partner with DHS through an Interagency Agreement. DHS also coordinates and collaborates with other agencies in specific areas and maintains an alliance with ANSI and Standards Development Organizations.

The DHS Standards Portfolio has a dual track approach: establishment of a permanent infrastructure for measurements and standards as well as a proactive, fast-track development of standards to meet urgent national needs in homeland security. Both credibility and consensus are needed for national standards to be accepted and NIST is the one agency that can ensure credibility, such as in the area of radiation standards. As the DHS Standards Executive, Dr. Coursey is involved with many management outreach activities, including serving as the DHS representative to ANSI and the Homeland Security Standards Panel (HSSP) where he interacts with Mary Saunders from NIST.

OSTP's Interagency Subcommittees for Decontamination Standards is an example of a successful tool for decision making across disciplines with a common interest. Dr. Jeffrey was involved in establishing these subcommittees while at OSTP. Another way to help gain consensus is through ANSI's Homeland Security Standards Panel, co-chaired by Mary Saunders.

The DHS Standards Portfolio is comprised of four major thrust areas that involve a total of 19 standards working groups with a portfolio manager, chair, and representatives from DHS, NIST, and many other public and private sector organizations. These groups were modeled after the successful implementation of the National Strategy for Developing Standards: Rad/Nuc Standards that was created prior to the establishment of DHS.

Three examples of NIST's significant standards and measurements contributions are in the areas of multimodal biometrics for travel documents, HAZMAT sampling and field detection of suspicious biothreat agents, and advanced technologies for screening cargo for nuclear and radiological materials. These activities involved 38 principal investigators at NIST from nearly every laboratory.

In summary, NIST critical contributions to homeland security include leadership in setting a national agenda; an honest broker for public-private partnerships; leadership and coordination on voluntary consensus standards, enabling metrology for new technology, testing and evaluation protocols; and laboratory accreditation and certification for products and processes.

Further details are provided in Dr. Coursey's presentation.

Discussion:

o Dr. Coursey will not be directly involved with the development of training standards.
o The amount of DHS funding to NIST was discussed.
o Another issue raised was homeland security needs in the area of information collection.

Measuring NIST's Contributions to Homeland Security
Kathleen Higgins, Chair, NIST Homeland Security Strategic Working Group (SWG)

Ms. Higgins indicated that she was proud of the Homeland Security SWG's contributions in helping to meet the nation's homeland security needs when she spoke at the December 2004 VCAT meeting and that she is even prouder now as she reviews their accomplishments against the homeland security metrics. Progress in these seven metrics demonstrates that NIST is a national treasure that is making a significant contribution to national priorities and that NIST is truly at the core of the U.S. measurement and standards efforts. NIST showed its commitment to the SWG by providing the necessary tools to meet the homeland security metrics. With these tools, the SWG provides productive working relationships, a NIST-wide perspective, guidance and advice, and a NIST "face" in homeland security.

Ms. Higgins provided an extensive review of how NIST's activities contribute to each of the seven metrics that NIST identified to meet the national priorities in homeland security. These metrics and example activity areas are summarized below:
- New measurement technologies and methods - Areas include biological agents, radiation dosimetry, Rad/Nuc detectors, sensors, explosives, concealed weapons detection, emergency response equipment, human recognition, materials, and public safety communications.
- New standards - Areas include biometrics, critical infrastructure protection, personal protection equipment, urban search and rescue robots, and involvement and leadership in Standards Development Organizations concerned with homeland security.
- Improvements in U.S. operational systems - Areas include magnetic tape analysis and data retrieval, accreditation programs, model conformity assessment programs for equipment, and support for first responders.
- Influence on U.S. industry - Areas include electronic documents, performance requirements, and R&D co-funding to industry from the Advanced Technology Program.
- Impact on national homeland security planning and policy - Areas include the US-VISIT Program, Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) and industry control processes, and interoperable communications. NIST received a commendation for its contributions in homeland security in the FY2005 Omnibus Appropriations Act.
- NIST staff detailed to DHS - For example, Bert Coursey, Director of DHS Standards Portfolio, and others in Standards Portfolio Office, SAFECOM, and elsewhere.
- Other Agency Funding - NIST experience and expertise has attracted millions of dollars in other agency funding and will continue to grow in support of NIST's homeland security efforts.

The Homeland Security SWG has been very important in identifying and applying these metrics to NIST's activities. The SWG held a professionally facilitated one-day offsite and developed four action steps to further improve its impact, including the development of a strategic plan and external outreach. The SWG members would like these four steps to be included in the homeland security performance metrics to help ensure NIST's continuing role in this area.

In summary, Ms. Higgins noted that NIST will need to make careful decisions about areas for expansion. NIST will consider OSTP's April 2005 report that provides a foundation for the nation's homeland security efforts as well as other external documents to help identify the Institute's unique skills and talent that can continue to make significant contributions to the nation's priorities.

Further details are provided in Ms. Higgins' presentation.

Discussion:

- Outreach - The importance of sharing these contributions to senior executives in DHS was raised. Dr. Coursey is trying to get the NIST Director involved in this activity. This interaction should not be difficult since the Director has worked in the past with the DHS leadership.
- Hazardous Materials - A VCAT member asked about NIST's programs concerned with hazardous materials. CSTL and EEEL are working on developing a microsensor array for detecting hazardous materials.
- Priorities and Resource Limitations - The difficulty of responding to priorities with limited resources was discussed. The SWG recognizes the importance of being present at discussions regarding priority-setting and funding decisions that will affect the future growth and development of a particular area. The members try to be involved in these discussions at various venues, but limited resources tend to restrict their participation. There is a trade-off between having NIST staff attend meetings and conducting research at NIST. NIST relies heavily on Dr. Coursey's advice on the meetings that NIST representatives should try to attend.
- Quantifying Performance Metrics - A VCAT member remarked that he was overwhelmed by the amount of work done by NIST in this area and asked about quantifiable metrics. NIST noted that numbers cannot be placed against the homeland security performance metrics. Metrics were developed and then the related activities, accomplishments, and other deliverables were identified. NIST could try to overlay the activities with the investment levels to see if there is a return on these dollars but this analysis would take time.

NIST Response to FY 2004 VCAT Annual Report Recommendations
Dr. William Jeffrey, NIST Director

Dr. Schweighart asked the VCAT to pay attention to Dr. Jeffrey's response to last year's recommendations since the contents of the FY 2005 Annual Report will be discussed at the Committee's closed working session. The members also should review the handout containing the Executive Summaries of the reports since 2001. The FY 2005 Annual Report will involve a lot of work between now and the end of the year. Dr. Schweighart will send a letter to transmit the report to the Secretary of Commerce who will most likely send a letter to the Hill to transmit the report.

Dr. Jeffrey provided the current status of NIST's response to each of the 12 recommendations included in the VCAT's FY 2004 Annual Report. These recommendations are grouped into four categories: budget, outreach, strategic direction and performance, and organizational excellence. He reviewed the progress on NIST's budget for the labs and facilities; stressed the importance of NIST-wide strategic planning, the USMS initiative, outreach activities, and strategic partnerships; highlighted NIST's performance and evaluation activities with an emphasis on the Baldrige process and revision of the FY 2005 Balanced Scorecard; and noted NIST's safety record in comparison with other government laboratories. In summary, some of the responses are a work-in process where there is a strong sense of alignment with the recommendations.

The information below supplements Dr. Jeffrey's presentation.

o Budget/ FY 2006 - Although the President's FY 2006 budget request for NIST's laboratories totals $427 million, both the House mark and the Senate committee mark have provided a lower amount. The full Senate is addressing the NIST budget today. The issue is to make sure that all of the Institute's stakeholders understand NIST and to balance its budget with other national priorities.
o Budget/Core Competencies - Dr. Jeffrey expects the VCAT to make sure that NIST continues to keep strategic planning as an important priority. He will continue to emphasize a clear alignment as possible between critical areas and investment decisions based on NIST's core competencies. This will be an on-going process.
o Budget/Facilities - Willie May will lead the tiger team for the National Nanomanufacturing and Nanometrology Facility (N3F) model. NIST senses a tremendous level of support for its facilities from OMB and Congress and is optimistic that it will continue to receive increased funding for the upgrades.
o Budget/ATP and MEP - The budgets for ATP and MEP are an on-going issue and their funding levels need to be stabilized.
o Outreach/Marketing Plan - The SMB has established a "key customer" outreach program by identifying key companies and company contacts. The goal is to communicate the new NIST message and to try to develop a one-on-one relationship with key industry stakeholders.
o Outreach/VCAT's Role - The VCAT's efforts in advising NIST's stakeholders on the strategic direction and value of NIST is very useful. It is very important to communicate the NIST message to its stakeholders.
o Strategic Direction and Performance/Baldrige Process - A Baldrige at NIST study group briefed the SMB on the draft Organizational Profile, a first step in the Baldrige process, and will refine this document based on the their comments. This activity will help the SMB and the next generation of NIST's leaders become familiar with the Institute's issues. NIST is making significant progress in its performance measurement and evaluation efforts.
o Strategic Direction and Performance/Strategic Focus Areas (SFAs) - Since many of the SFAs are very broad, Dr. Jeffrey requested each SWG to develop a list of high priority areas with recommendations for investments in personnel and facilities. Now that NIST has a catalog of its research in Biosystems and Health, the Institute is preparing a gap analysis to identify the areas where NIST should be involved and the related investment strategies.
o Strategic Direction and Performance/Partnerships - It is relatively easy for two government agencies to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that states how well the agencies will work together. However, NIST is developing a strategy for entering into MOUs and other partnerships that seek to identify NIST's specific contributions that can leverage the synergy between NIST and the other organizations. NIST intends to clearly identify the needs, financial requirements, and commitments before the Institute enters into an MOU.
o Strategic Direction and Performance/USMS - Inputs from the USMS effort will have a greater impact on NIST's long-range strategic plan in 2010. Over the next four to five years years, NIST's budget decisions will be based on current knowledge and then for the long-term, will be based on the analysis of the NIST role in support of the USMS needs.
o Organizational Excellence/Aging Buildings and Facilities - There is a photograph at the NIST Boulder laboratories of President Eisenhower breaking a champagne bottle in celebration of the opening of these facilities.
o Organizational Excellence/Safety - NIST will continue to seek advice on best safety practices from other agencies.

Discussion:

o ATP's Budget - The VCAT chair noted that there were ATP project commitments that needed to be completed prior to terminating the program and stressed the importance of communicating the associated close-out costs to decision makers. According to Dr. Jeffrey, the actual amount of ATP's close-out costs in FY 2006 are well understood by the Administration. He further noted that the lack of stability in ATP's funding level makes long-range planning difficult. The VCAT chair stressed that the Committee's recommendations were aimed at NIST and elsewhere in recognition that NIST does not have control over the budget process.
o USMS - NIST noted that there is a growing momentum in the customer base for the USMS. NIST plans to develop their priorities for its future competencies that will be generic across the nation. NIST will start by selecting a few industry sectors or technology development areas to identify the common measurement themes that will help drive national priorities, such as nanotechnology.
o Safety - A VCAT member noted the importance of examining near misses in safety incidents. This is very interesting data and NIST is already sharing this information. Another VCAT member noted that some companies make the punishment for not reporting near misses greater than reporting them. For example, some companies may terminate employees for not reporting near misses. A good challenge for NIST is to remain vigilant about improving its safety data because an organization's safety record rarely stays the same. Dr. Jeffrey thanked the Committee for its attention to this topic.
o Mad Cow Disease - In response to a VCAT member's question, NIST is not involved in the testing for mad cow disease. The strategic planning process would highlight if there is a need for this testing and what others are doing in this area.

The open session of the meeting was adjourned at 4:30 pm.

Page created:12/27/05

Page maintained by: VCAT webmaster