NIST appears to walk back limits on international researchers

Update, March 12, 2026: This story has been updated with details from a March 5 Senate hearing in which Sen. John Hickenlooper questioned the NIST director nominee about reports that NIST considered restricting access for hundreds of non-U.S. researchers.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology appears to be walking back policies that limited the number of international researchers at the federal lab.

In February, Boulder Reporting Lab broke a story about NIST enacting unpublished policies that placed three-year caps on international researchers and required reviews of the agreements granting them lab access. Last month, Democrats on the House Science Committee pressed Acting NIST Director Craig Burkhardt to address the changes by Feb. 25, but received no response. On March 6, NIST researchers received their first written communication about the policies in an email from Burkhardt that suggested the policies were not in place.

“There is no explicit ban on foreign national research associates from any country, nor any mandated time limit or cap for the length of an associate’s potential tenure at NIST,” the email stated.

When the first policies rolled out at NIST’s two main campuses, in Boulder and Maryland, they were communicated to researchers only verbally. International researchers were told the agreements granting them lab access would need to be personally approved by Burkhardt, and reviews would be scheduled based on a country-based risk framework, multiple sources told Boulder Reporting Lab. Scientists from countries deemed “high risk,” including China, Russia, Venezuela and Iran, were scheduled to face review first, on March 31. 

Some international researchers saw their contract terms shortened to March 31 to reflect that deadline, according to internal sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Sources within NIST said that foreign nationals have been told by their lab group leaders that the deadline is no longer in place. No more contracts are being changed, but those that were changed over the past two months have not been reverted to their original end date. Leadership still appears to be reviewing those, and others may just have their review date pushed to later in the year, according to internal sources. 

A NIST spokesperson told Boulder Reporting Lab he had “no additional information at this time.”

The uncertainty is pushing some international researchers to leave.

“I know several foreign nationals who are nevertheless leaving NIST as soon as they can,” one source said. 

NIST researchers advance “measurement science,” like quantum science, that underpins nearly every sector of modern life. International Ph.D. students at the lab are working on projects that take five to seven years to complete. Sources say that if foreign nationals are unsure whether they can complete their work at NIST, they will look elsewhere, and the lab will lose the expertise of researchers leading cutting-edge projects.

U.S. House Reps. Zoe Lofgren of California and April McClain Delaney of Maryland have voiced concerns about the changes. The issue reached the Senate, where Arvind Raman, Trump’s nominee for NIST director, faced questions at a confirmation hearing last week.

During the March 5 hearing, Colorado Sen. John Hickenlooper asked Raman whether he was aware of reports that NIST had attempted “to expel over 500 researchers from NIST facilities if they were non-U.S. citizens.”

“I have only seen reporting on this subject and am not aware of any policy on this subject,” Raman said. “If confirmed, I am committed to ensuring that NIST is able to access the best talent in order to meet its mission, while ensuring appropriate safeguards are in place to mitigate risks to research security.”

Both Hickenlooper and Washington Sen. Maria Cantwell noted that Raman himself immigrated to the United States from India. Cantwell asked whether it was important that international researchers and students have opportunities similar to the ones he had as a foreign-born scientist pursuing research in the U.S.

Raman responded by reiterating his focus on research security, and added that the U.S. should also encourage more undergraduate students to pursue Ph.D. programs.

Raman did not directly answer Hickenlooper’s question about whether foreign researchers contribute to the success of U.S. scientific leadership. He also declined to commit to maintaining NIST’s university partnership program, the Professional Research Experience Program (PREP), or to ensuring that graduate students currently conducting PhD research at NIST would be able to complete their work.

Hickenlooper also asked Raman what new streamlined visas created by countries including Canada, Germany, France and Japan to attract researchers leaving the United States say about the message the U.S. is sending internationally. Raman did not respond directly to that question.

Meanwhile, the uncertainty surrounding the proposed changes has already begun to ripple outward. The changes have pushed some companies that work with NIST to cut ties.

Poolad Imany, the CEO of Icarus Quantum, wrote in a LinkedIn post last month that because of the changes, “we need to look elsewhere for nanofabrication facilities, which means that Icarus will be leaving Colorado.”

NIST officials have said the changes were meant to address security concerns.On Feb. 17, a NIST spokesperson told Boulder Reporting Lab that the policy changes were “intended to ensure that NIST’s foreign national associate program is supporting NIST’s mission needs, adding value to the organization and minimizing risk to the nation.”

Burkhardt’s email echoed those concerns about international security and suggested the rules could change again, writing that “NIST is currently reviewing its research security protocols to ensure alignment with evolving laws and guidance as well as consistency with other agencies.”