Triennial Review of the
NATIONAL
NANOTECHNOLOGY
INITIATIVE
Committee on Triennial Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative:
Phase II
National Materials and Manufacturing Board
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by Contract CBET-1138917 between the National Research Council and the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-26922-3
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-26922-9
This report is available in limited quantities from:
National Materials and Manufacturing Board
500 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
nmmb@nas.edu
http://www.nationalacademies.edu/nmmb
Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2013 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
This page intentionally left blank.
COMMITTEE ON TRIENNIAL REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL NANOTECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE: PHASE II
CAROL A. HANDWERKER, Purdue University, Co-chair
MICHAEL N. HELMUS, Consultant, Worcester, Massachusetts, Co-chair
ROBERT R. DOERING, Texas Instruments, Inc.
LEE FLEMING, University of California, Berkeley
PAUL A. FLEURY, Yale University
LIESL FOLKS, Hitachi Global Storage Technologies
ROBERT HULL, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
JACQUELINE A. ISAACS, Northeastern University
DONALD H. LEVY, University of Chicago
CELIA MERZBACHER, Semiconductor Research Corporation
OMKARAM NALAMASU, Applied Materials, Inc.
WOLFGANG POROD, University of Notre Dame
ALAN RAE, TPF Enterprises, LLC
ELSA REICHMANIS, Georgia Institute of Technology
JUDITH STEIN, General Electric Global Research Center
CHARLES F. ZUKOSKI, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Staff
DENNIS CHAMOT, Acting Director, NMMB
ERIK B. SVEDBERG, Study Director
ANN F. LARROW, Program Associate (as of August 2012)
HEATHER LOZOWSKI, Financial Associate
RICKY D. WASHINGTON, Administrative Coordinator (until July 2012)
NATIONAL MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING BOARD
ROBERT H. LATIFF, R. Latiff Associates, Chair
DENISE F. SWINK, Independent Consultant, Germantown, Maryland, Vice-chair
PETER R. BRIDENBAUGH, NAE,1 ALCOA (retired), Boca Raton, Florida
VALERIE M. BROWNING, ValTech Solutions, LLC
PAUL CITRON, NAE, Medtronic, Inc. (retired), Minnetonka, Minnesota
GEORGE T. (RUSTY) GRAY III, Los Alamos National Laboratory
CAROL A. HANDWERKER, Purdue University
SUNDARESAN JAYARAMAN, Georgia Institute of Technology
DAVID W. JOHNSON, JR., NAE, Stevens Institute of Technology
MICHAEL F. McGRATH, Analytic Services Inc.
NABIL NASR, Golisano Institute for Sustainability
PAUL S. PEERCY, NAE, University of Wisconsin-Madison
ROBERT C. PFAHL, JR., International Electronics Manufacturing Initiative
VINCENT J. RUSSO, Aerospace Technologies Associates, LLC
KENNETH H. SANDHAGE, Georgia Institute of Technology
ROBERT E. SCHAFRIK, GE Aviation
HAYDN WADLEY, University of Virginia
STEVEN WAX, Independent Consultant, Reston, Virginia
Staff
DENNIS CHAMOT, Acting Director
ERIK B. SVEDBERG, Senior Program Officer
ANN F. LARROW, Program Associate (as of August 2012)
HEATHER LOZOWSKI, Financial Associate
RICKY D. WASHINGTON, Administrative Coordinator (until July 2012)
1 NAE, National Academy of Engineering.
Preface
The National Research Council was asked by the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office (NNCO) to review the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) pursuant to the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, Section 5 of Public Law 108-153.1 A cross-disciplinary, complex system with a diverse stakeholder base, the NNI coordinates nanotechnology-related R&D of 26 federal agencies. Owing to the complex and extensive nature of its review, the committee prepared an interim report on one of the three tasks within the statement of task (Appendix A)2—specifically, Task 2, assessment of progress and metrics. The main text of the interim report, which substantially informed this final report, is reprinted in Appendix E.
As the United States faces grave financial challenges, the ability of a program like the NNI to become economically effective in facilitating the creation of technology, products, and jobs in almost all sectors of the economy is a bright beacon. As co-chairs we are honored to work on evaluating a program that has such potential to benefit science and society.
We thank the committee members for their exceptional efforts in preparing this report. In executing its charge, the committee met five times from January 11 to
1 The first review by the National Research Council was published as A Matter of Size: Triennial Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2006.
2 National Research Council, Interim Report for the Triennial Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative, Phase II, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., 2012 (reprinted in Appendix E).
September 13, 2012. The committee also heard from a broad spectrum of speakers from government, industry, consultant organizations, nonprofit trade organizations, and academe. In particular, the committee thanks the following for their contributions to this study and for their participation in the committee’s meetings: Robert Celotta, Hongda Chen, Hilary Flynn, Lynn E. Foster, Chuck Geraci, Piotr Grodzinski, Barbara Herr Harthorn, Bruce Kisliuk, Harriet Kung, Julia Lane, Robert Langer, Matthew Laudon, Minh Le, Alex Liddle, Carlos Peña, Tom Picraux, Robert Pohanka, Mihail C. Roco, Jonathan M. Samet, Maxine Savitz, Brent Segal, Neal D. Shinn, Phillip Singerman, Lewis E. Sloter II, Jerry Thursby, Sally Tinkle, Michael S. Tomczyk, and Bob Welch. We also thank the following National Cancer Institute staff for their participation in a conference call: Dorothy Farrell, George Hinkal, Nora Miralieva, and Stephanie Morris.
We and the committee also thank the interim director of the National Materials and Manufacturing Board, Dennis Chamot, and the study director, Erik Svedberg, for their help and guidance in performing this triennial review. And we express special appreciation to staff members Laura Toth, Linda Williams, Ricky D. Washington, and Ann Larrow for assistance with meeting arrangements and all the daily tasks.
Carol A. Handwerker, Co-Chair
Michael N. Helmus, Co-Chair
Committee on Triennial Review of the National Nanotechnology Initiative: Phase II
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This report has been reviewed in draft form by persons chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following for their review of the report:
Harold G. Craighead, NAE,1 Cornell University,
Mildred Dresselhaus, NAS2/NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Michael Ettenberg, NAE, DOLCE Technologies,
Abbas Firoozabadi, NAE, Yale University,
Robert E. Fontana, Jr., NAE, IBM,
Kinam Kim, NAE, Samsung Advanced Institute of Technology,
Subhash Mahajan, NAE, University of California, Davis,
Edward Przybylowicz, NAE, Eastman Kodak Company (retired), and
Axel Scherer, California Institute of Technology.
1 NAE, National Academy of Engineering.
2 NAS, National Academy of Sciences.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of the report was overseen by Carl Lineberger, NAS, University of Colorado, Boulder, and Major General Richard Paul, U.S. Air Force, retired. Appointed by the National Research Council, they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of the report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
Contents
Overview of the National Nanotechnology Initiative
2 MEASURING PROGRESS AND DEFINING SUCCESS IN THE CONTEXT OF FEDERAL RESEARCH INITIATIVES
3 NATIONAL NANOTECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE STAKEHOLDERS
Fostering Interaction and Engagement
National Nanotechnology Initiative Planning, Coordination, and Management by Federal Stakeholders
Stakeholders Receiving National Nanotechnology Initiative–Related Federal Funding
Building a Stronger Community of Federally Funded National Nanotechnology Initiative Stakeholders
4 METRICS, DEFINITIONS OF SUCCESS, AND DATA
Establishing Metrics for Quality Improvement
Definitions of Success and Metrics for the NNI: Built on Data and Science
Data Sets Essential to NNI Assessment
Operational Issues: Collecting, Tracking, and Evaluating Data
5 PLANNING, MANAGEMENT, AND COORDINATION FRAMEWORK FOR THE NATIONAL NANOTECHNOLOGY INITIATIVE
Interagency Management and Coordination
Setting Research Directions: Roadmapping
Building a Nanotechnology Community
Role of the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office
6 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND COMMERCIALIZATION
Current Nanotechnology Commercialization Activities
Models for Technology Transfer and Commercialization
7 OVERARCHING AND CROSSCUTTING THEMES AND PRIORITIES
