AN ASSESSMENT OF THE COMMUNICATIONS
TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY AT THE NATIONAL
INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY
FISCAL YEAR 2019
Panel on Review of the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s
Communications Technology Laboratory
Laboratory Assessments Board
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
A Consensus Study Report of
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by Contract No. SB134117CQ0017 with the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-49895-1
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-49895-3
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/25602
Additional copies of this publication 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 2019 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. An Assessment of the Communications Technology Laboratory at the National Institute of Standards and Technology: Fiscal Year 2019. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25602.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson, is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
PANEL ON REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY’S COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY
DOUGLAS SICKER, Carnegie Mellon University, Chair
MILIND BUDDHIKOT, Nokia Bell Labs
SAMIR DAS, State University of New York, Stony Brook
MONISHA GHOSH, University of Chicago
DAVID GOODMAN, NAE,1 Tandon School of Engineering, New York University
ISMAIL GUVENC, North Carolina State University
CYNTHIA HOOD, Illinois Institute of Technology
JOSEP JORNET, Northeastern University
PAUL KOLODZY, Kolodzy Consulting, LLC
LAWRENCE LARSON, Brown University
DAVID MATOLAK, University of South Carolina
JEFFREY REED, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
AKBAR SAYEED, University of Wisconsin, Madison
HAROLD ZHENG, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
Staff
AZEB GETACHEW, Senior Program Assistant
EVA LABRE, Administrative Coordinator
JAMES P. MCGEE, Director
MARTIN OFFUTT, Senior Program Officer
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
COMMITTEE ON NIST TECHNICAL PROGRAMS
ELSA REICHMANIS, NAE,1 Georgia Institute of Technology, Chair
MICHAEL I. BASKES, NAE, Mississippi State University
LEWIS M. BRANSCOMB, NAS2/NAE/NAM,3 University of California, San Diego
MARTIN E. GLICKSMAN, NAE, Florida Institute of Technology
JENNIE S. HWANG, NAE, H-Technologies Group, Inc.
CHRISTOPHER W. MACOSKO, NAE, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
C. KUMAR N. PATEL, NAS/NAE, Pranalytica, Inc.
BHAKTA B. RATH, NAE, Naval Research Laboratory
ALICE WHITE, Boston University
Staff
AZEB GETACHEW, Senior Program Assistant
EVA LABRE, Administrative Coordinator
JAMES P. MCGEE, Director
MARTIN OFFUTT, Senior Program Officer
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering,
2 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
3 Member, National Academy of Medicine.
LABORATORY ASSESSMENTS BOARD
ROSS B. COROTIS, NAE,1 University of Colorado, Boulder, Chair
WESLEY L. HARRIS, NAE, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
JENNIE S. HWANG, NAE, H-Technologies Group
W. CARL LINEBERGER, NAS,2 University of Colorado, Boulder
C. KUMAR N. PATEL, NAS/NAE, Pranalytica, Inc.
ELSA REICHMANIS, NAE, Georgia Institute of Technology
LYLE H. SCHWARTZ, NAE, U.S. Air Force Office of Scientific Research (retired)
Staff
AZEB GETACHEW, Senior Program Assistant
EVA LABRE, Administrative Coordinator
JAMES P. MCGEE, Director
ARUL MOZHI, Senior Program Officer
MARTIN OFFUTT, Senior Program Officer
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
2 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
This page intentionally left blank.
Preface
A White House advisory council has noted: “If the Nation instead expands its options for managing federal spectrum, we can transform the availability of a precious national resource — spectrum—from scarcity to abundance.”1 The use of radio-frequency technology for communications, radio location, entertainment, and more continues to experience tremendous growth, and with this it plays an increasingly critical role in our daily lives. Given the challenge of accessing additional RF spectrum for these technologies, it is essential to effectively and efficiently use these spectrum resources. The Department of Commerce operates the Communications Technology Laboratory (CTL), which provides the nation with a laboratory dedicated to improving the use of radio frequency spectrum. CTL was established in 2014 by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) by merging several components of existing NIST laboratories into a single entity focused on promoting standards and metrology in the area of communications technologies. In the last 5 years, CTL has grown to establish significant efforts in the areas of measurement and standards relating to spectrum use and other wireless technologies. The lab also has a prominent role in public safety communications, where it serves as the future technology lead for the Department of Commerce’s First Responder Network Authority (FirstNet), the emerging public safety broadband network in the United States. CTL has also recently launched the National Advanced Spectrum and Communications Technology Network, designed to help create a trusted spectrum testing and measurement organization to aid in spectrum sharing efforts.
In 2015, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report on the Boulder, Colorado, communications technology laboratory of the Department of Commerce2 described many of the critical uses of radio communications and highlighted important research priorities for this laboratory. It also guided CTL to continue to refine and extend its efforts in wireless metrology, spectrum sharing, and public safety communications. In 2019, a second panel was engaged to assess efforts within CTL. The Director of NIST requested that the panel focus its assessment on the following factors: (1) the organization’s technical programs; (2) the portfolio of scientific expertise within the organization; (3) the adequacy of the organization’s facilities, equipment, and human resources; and (4) the effectiveness by which the organization disseminates its program outputs.3 The panel was directed to focus on two main categories: public safety communications, and metrology for advanced communications. These include
___________________
1 President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, 2012, Realizing the Full Potential of Government-Held Spectrum to Spur Economic Growth, Executive Office of the President, Washington, D.C., July 20.
2 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2015, Telecommunications Research and Engineering at the Communications Technology Laboratory of the Department of Commerce: Meeting the Nation’s Telecommunications Needs, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.
3 W.G. Copan, Ph.D., Director, NIST and Undersecretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology, “Memorandum for Panel of the National Research Council Committee on National Institute of Standards and Technology Technical Programs,” March 14, 2019.
the four CTL priority areas: (1) public safety communications, (2) trusted spectrum testing, (3) fundamental metrology for communications, and (4) Next Generation Wireless (5G and Beyond). This report provides the National Academies’ assessment of CTL. The panel also assessed the extent to which CTL followed the recommendations made in the 2015 National Academies’ report.1 The panel visited the Boulder telecommunications laboratories on June 25-27, 2019, meeting with staff from CTL to understand the current activities of the laboratory, its strengths and weaknesses as an organization, and its plans for the near future. The assessment included in this report stems from these visits and discussions, and the committee’s own expertise.
Douglas Sicker, Chair
Panel on Review of the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s Communications Technology Laboratory
___________________
1 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2015, Telecommunications Research and Engineering at the Communications Technology Laboratory of the Department of Commerce: Meeting the Nation’s Telecommunications Needs, The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, 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 individuals for their review of this report:
Ian Akyildiz, Georgia Institute of Technology,
Danijela Cabric, University of California, Los Angeles,
Edward Frank,1 NAE, Cloud Parity, Inc.,
Alan Kaplan, Princeton University,
Rob Leonard, Fire Department of the City of New York,
Dennis Roberson, Illinois Institute of Technology, and
Murat Yuksel, University of Central Florida.
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Neil G. Siegel, NAE, University of Southern California. He was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
This page intentionally left blank.
This page intentionally left blank.