Cast metals bill could pave way for increasing foundry research.

C

More than 7600 pieces of legislation have been introduced in the current U.S. Congress-an impressive number indeed. Measures were introduced dealing with every conceivable topic from A" (aflatoxin in core) to Z" (zinc in Superfund). Nevertheless, only a scant number of these measures has been enacted into law-673 to be exact. Two of the 7600 measures are of direct interest and ultimate benefit to the metalcasting industry-S. 775/H.R. 1243, the Metal Casting Research bill.

Competition for the time, attention, energy and, ultimately, the vote of Congress is rigorous. The difference between a bill that is merely introduced and one that is actually enacted into law is dependent upon a number of critical factors: * the merit underlying the issue; * drafting the bill so that it falls within the jurisdiction of a favorable congressional committee; * enlisting the support of a few strong congressional champions; *achieving a positive showing of grassroots support; * gathering a respectable number of cosponsors; * maneuvering through legislative obstacles; and *showing flexibility necessary to accommodate objections.

It is neither by accident or coincidence that of all the pending legislation the metalcasting bill is moving through the legislative process with remarkable speed. By design, factors critical to legislative success have all been put into play relative to the metalcasting research legislation. The result is that final enactment into law appears to be likely during this Congress.

The formation of the Cast Metals Coalition (CMC) in January 1990was initiated by the American Foundrymen's Society (AFS) and other industry leaders. For the first time in the history of the metalcasting industry, six major metalcasting associations have combined their resources, time and energy to promote a legislative issue.

The coalition consists of AFS, the Investment Casting Institute (ICI), American Cast Metals Assn (ACMA), Steel Founders' Society of America (SFSA), Casting Industry Suppliers Assn (CISA) and the North American Die Casting Assn (NADCA). Goals of the Bill

The first section of the bill sets forth a clear recognition by Congress of the importance of our industry to the nation and the need for federal support of advanced research and technology in metalcasting.

Congress finds that: * Metalcasting is an important process for manufacturing many items imported into or exported from the U.S.; * Encouraging and maintaining a technically advanced U.S. metalcasting industry is essential to the competitiveness of many American industries; * Maintaining a viable metalcasting industry is vital to the national security and economic well-being of the United States; * Promotion of technology competitiveness and energy efficiency in the U.S. metalcasting industry by the federal government is necessary to maintain a viable metalcasting industry; * Many individual metalcasting companies lack the resources to conduct metalcasting research alone, placing them at a serious competitive disadvantage; * Support of university-based research in metalcasting is important in promoting technology development and providing industry with qualified engineers; * By combining the resources of the federal government, universities, industry and private organizations to conduct research and development activities, substantial technological benefits will be the result for the metaicasting industry.

If this legislation is enacted into law, it will authorize the secretary of the Dept of Energy (DOE) to establish a Metal Casting Competitiveness Research Program. industry and the federal government would equally contribute matching financial resources.

An industry advisory board would be established within 60 days after the bill is enacted. This board would consist of nine industry members selected by the secretary of energy after consulting with representatives of the trade and technical associations of the metalcasting industry. The advisory board would provide guidance and oversee implementing the selection of research projects for funding and operation of the program. CMC's Role

The Cast Metals Coalition has spoken with a single, strong voice on behalf of the cast metals industry relative to this legislation and we are being heard. The coalition provides greater geographic diversity and cohesive political muscle to our efforts and provided the base for a grass-roots effort that resulted in an impressive 112 House cosponsors.

In addition, top executives from the foundry industry have served as expert witnesses, testifying before both House and Senate hearings on the bill. Technical assistance has also been provided by individuals from various metalcasting associations. They have teamed up and have been instrumental in drafting language, providing answers to technical questions and stirring up grass-roots interest.

The coalition has assisted in mediating differences between the two very different languages that were passed by the full House and Senate. This arbitration has resulted in the protection of industry's interests on major provisions of the legislation.

The House and Senate have met jointly to resolve the differences in the language of the two bills and have produced a single version that is one vote short of full authorization by Congress. The bill is now in the appropriations stage.

The House subcommittee on interior appropriations met in late July and approved funding $1.25 million for this bill. However, instead of making the funds available to open, competitive bidding, all of the money was earmarked for the Univ of Alabama/Tuscaloosa.

University officials have assured AFS that they were not aware of the House subcommittee's intent to specify the funds. The Senate interior Appropriations Committee still needs to review and recommend appropriations on this bill.

The AFS Position

While AFS has no objection to a portion of the funding being designated for the Univ of Alabama, there is concern that other qualified universities and researchers will be eliminated from openly competing for these funds. It is important to the future of this legislation that tangible research results be demonstrated in a wide variety of research interest during the first year of funding. This will assure future broad-based industry and academic support for continuing the program in subsequent funding years.

AFS is working to assure a maximum benefit from this bill to the entire foundry industry. We are working with the CMC to secure commitments from key senators to support additional appropriations to the bill before enactment. Several senators have been contacted in their home states and in Washington D.C.

In addition, AFS members have been asked to write or visit their senators regarding this legislation. The involvement and willingness to help has been tremendous.

Second, AFS has met with the president of the Univ of Alabama and its vice president of research to discuss the relevant issues surrounding the potential appropriations of these funds. The issues discussed were: *What is the focus of technology programs to be conducted by the university? A detailed outline of these research areas has been requested. This would allow our members, through the AFS technical committees, to determine our level of support and involvement. Agreement has been reached that AFS will work with the university, where appropriate, in developing the required technical programs for metalcasting research. What specific plans does the university have for the $400,000 of AFS research programs presently at the university? It would be beneficial for the university to expand these programs and use AFS money to match the federal funding. But, before a commitment is made to expand these programs, each of the projects' steering committees would have to agree to the technical merit addressed on the project expansion proposal.

This would allow for short-term success to be demonstrated to the government in the first year of this funding. Additionally, it would leverage the available AFS research funds, for these projects, 100%.

Finally, what are the university's intentions regarding subcontracts to other universities that have developed expertise in areas of metalcasting research which Alabama may not have? We believe that some of the funds need to be made available to other universities. This will maximize the overall benefits to be derived from this program in the short term.

It is doubtful that expertise in all areas of metalcasting can be developed by the Univ of Alabama in one year. Since continuing this program into the second and third year will depend on broad based research and industry support, the university has been urged to seriously consider these proposals.