59–006 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 110–173 

GREEN ENERGY EDUCATION ACT OF 2007 

JUNE 5, 2007.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and orderedto be printed 

Mr. GORDON of Tennessee, from the Committee on Science and 

Technology, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 1716] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Science and Technology, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 1716) to authorize higher education curriculum 

development and graduate training in advanced energy and green 

building technologies, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that the bill as 

amended do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

I. Amendment ................................................................................................. 1 

II. Purpose of the Bill ...................................................................................... 2 

III. Background and Need for the Legislation ................................................ 2 

IV. Hearing Summary ....................................................................................... 3 

V. Committee Actions ...................................................................................... 3 

VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill .................................................. 3 

VII. Section-by-Section Analysis (by Title and Section) .................................. 3 

VIII. Committee Views ........................................................................................ 4 

IX. Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. 4 

X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ............................................. 4 

XI. Compliance with Public Law 104–4 .......................................................... 5 

XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations ........................... 5 

XIII. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives ...................... 5 

XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement .......................................................... 5 

XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement ................................................... 6 

XVI. Congressional Accountability Act .............................................................. 6 

XVII. Earmark Identification ............................................................................... 6 

XVIII. Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law ........................ 6 

XIX. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................ 6 

XX. Committee Recommendations .................................................................... 6 

XXI. Proceedings of the Full Committee Markup ............................................. 7 

I. AMENDMENT

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
2 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Green Energy Education Act of 2007’’. 

SEC. 2. DEFINITION. 

For the purposes of this Act: 

(1) DIRECTOR.—The term ‘‘Director’’ means the Director of the National 

Science Foundation. 

(2) HIGH PERFORMANCE BUILDING.—The term ‘‘high performance building’’ has 

the meaning given that term in section 914(a) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 

(42 U.S.C. 16194(a)). 

(3) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of Energy. 

SEC. 3. GRADUATE TRAINING IN ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. 

(a) FUNDING.—In carrying out research, development, demonstration, and commercial application activities authorized for the Department of Energy, the Secretary may contribute funds to the National Science Foundation for the Integrative 

Graduate Education and Research Traineeship program to support projects that enable graduate education related to such activities. 

(b) CONSULTATION.—The Director shall consult with the Secretary when preparing 

solicitations and awarding grants for projects described in subsection (a). 

SEC. 4. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT FOR HIGH PERFORMANCE BUILDING DESIGN. 

(a) FUNDING.—In carrying out advanced energy technology research, development, 

demonstration, and commercial application activities authorized for the Department 

of Energy related to high performance buildings, the Secretary may contribute funds 

to curriculum development activities at the National Science Foundation for the 

purpose of improving undergraduate or graduate interdisciplinary engineering and 

architecture education related to the design and construction of high performance 

buildings, including development of curricula, of laboratory activities, of training 

practicums, or of design projects. A primary goal of curriculum development activities supported under this section shall be to improve the ability of engineers, architects, landscape architects, and planners to work together on the incorporation of 

advanced energy technologies during the design and construction of high performance buildings. 

(b) CONSULTATION.—The Director shall consult with the Secretary when preparing 

solicitations and awarding grants for projects described in subsection (a). 

(c) PRIORITY.—In awarding grants with respect to which the Secretary has contributed funds under this section, the Director shall give priority to applications 

from departments, programs, or centers of a school of engineering that are 

partnered with schools, departments, or programs of design, architecture, and city, 

regional, or urban planning. 

II. PURPOSE

The purpose of this bill is to authorize higher education curriculum development and graduate training in advanced energy 

and green building technologies. 

III. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

Affordable, clean energy is essential to the Nation’s continued 

prosperity. The legislation addresses a significant opportunity for 

energy savings and greenhouse gas emissions reductions: energy 

consumption in buildings. According to Department of Energy 

(DOE) 2003 statistics, buildings consume more energy than any 

other sector of the economy, including industrial processes and 

transportation. Buildings consume 39 percent of primary energy in 

the United States and 70 percent of electricity. Innovations in highperformance building technologies, materials, techniques and systems, combined with advances in photovoltaic and other distributed 

clean energy technologies, have the potential to dramatically transform the pattern of energy consumption associated with buildings. 

These building systems and components—coupled with a whole 

building approach that optimizes the interactions among building 

systems and components—enable buildings to use considerably less 

energy, while also helping to meet national goals for sustainable 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
3 

development, environmental protection, and energy security. But 

achieving this depends on architects, engineers, contractors and 

other buildings professionals working together from the earliest 

stages of planning. The legislation would provide interdisciplinary 

education and training in high-performance building design and 

construction to the next generation of architects and engineers. 

IV. HEARING SUMMARY

On November 2, 2005, the Subcommittee on Energy of the Committee on Science held a hearing on ‘‘Winning Teams and Innovative Technologies from the 2005 Solar Decathlon’’. Appearing as 

witnesses were (1) Mr. Richard F. Moorer, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Technology Development, Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, DOE; (2) Mr. David G. Schieren, Graduate Student and Energy Team Leader, Energy Management, New York Institute of Technology; (3) Mr. Jeffrey R. Lyng, Graduate Student 

and Team Project Manager, Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering, University of Colorado; (4) Mr. Jonathan R. 

Knowles, Professor and Team Advisor, Department of Architecture, 

Rhode Island School of Design; and (5) Mr. Robert P. Schubert, 

Professor and Team Advisor, Department of Architecture, Virginia 

Polytechnic Institute. The Solar Decathlon brings together architecture and engineering students to design and build a house that is 

scored for both its energy consumption and its aesthetics and 

functionality. One of the topics discussed by the panel, which included both architects and engineers, was the need for institutionalizing such collaboration between architecture and engineering 

departments on university campuses. 

V. COMMITTEE ACTIONS

As summarized in Section IV of this report, the Subcommittee on 

Energy heard testimony in the 109th Congress relevant to the programs authorized in H.R. 1716. 

On March 9, 2007, Representative Michael McCaul, for himself 

and Representatives Hill, Ehlers, Schwartz and McCotter, introduced H.R. 1716, the ‘‘Green Energy Education Act of 2007,’’ to authorize higher education curriculum development and graduate 

training in advanced energy and green building technologies. 

On May 23, 2007, the Committee on Science and Technology met 

to consider H.R. 1716 and ordered the bill reported favorably. 

VI. SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS OF THE BILL

Authorizes the Department of Energy and the National Science 

Foundation to collaborate on the solicitation and funding of grants 

to institutions of higher education for education and training in 

clean energy and high-performance building design. 

VII. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF THE BILL

Sec. 1. Short Title.—‘‘Green Energy Education Act of 2007.’’ 

Sec. 2. Definitions.—Provides definitions for terms used in this 

Act. 

Sec. 3. Graduate Training in Energy Research and Development.—Authorizes Department of Energy (DOE) to contribute 

funds to the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Integrative GradVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:32 Jun 06, 2007 Jkt 059006 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR173.XXX HR173

hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
4 

uate Education and Research Traineeship (IGERT) program in support of projects related to energy research, development, demonstration and commercial application. IGERT awards prepare doctoral students by integrating research and education in innovative 

ways that are tailored to the unique requirements of newly emerging interdisciplinary fields and new career options. 

Sec. 4. Curriculum Development for High Performance Building 

Design.—Authorizes DOE’s high performance buildings technologies programs to contribute to NSF’s ongoing curriculum development activities for the purpose of improving undergraduate and 

graduate interdisciplinary engineering and architecture education 

related to the design and construction of high performance buildings. Requires the Director of NSF to consult with the Secretary of 

Energy in awarding grants for this purpose. Gives priority to applications for schools, departments, or programs of engineering that 

are partnered with schools, departments or programs of design, architecture and city, regional, or urban planning. 

VIII. COMMITTEE VIEWS

The Committee intends this bill to promote broad collaboration 

between universities and DOE applied energy technology programs. 

The Committee expects that the funding DOE provides to NSF for 

IGERT grants under this Act will come primarily from the fossil, 

nuclear, electricity delivery and energy reliability, and energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. The Committee does not intend for the energy technology offices to shift their responsibility 

for partnering with universities to cultivate the next generation of 

energy technology experts to the Office of Science. 

IX. COST ESTIMATE

A cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of the 

Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted to the Committee on 

Science and Technology prior to the filing of this report and is included in Section X of this report pursuant to House Rule XIII, 

clause 3(c)(3). 

H.R. 1716 does not contain new budget authority, credit authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures. Assuming that the 

sums authorized under the bill are appropriated, H.R. 1716 does 

authorize additional discretionary spending, as described in the 

Congressional Budget Office report on the bill, which is contained 

in Section X of this report. 

X. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

H.R. 1716—Green Energy Education Act of 2007 

H.R. 1716 would authorize the Secretary of Energy to transfer 

funds to the National Science Foundation (NSF) for undergraduate 

and graduate education programs related to energy research and 

development and the design and construction of high-performance 

buildings. High-performance buildings, as defined by the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005, are those that optimize energy efficiency, durability, life-cycle performance, and occupants’ productivity. CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1716 would have no significant cost 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
5 

over the next five years. Enacting this legislation would not affect 

revenues and would have no significant impact on direct spending. 

Section 3 would authorize the Secretary to transfer funds to 

NSF’s Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship 

(IGERT) program. IGERT is an NSF-wide effort to provide funding 

to universities that offer stipend support and tuition allowances to 

students in science and engineering. Currently, NSF plans to allocate about $67 million to IGERT in 2007. Under the bill, any funds 

transferred to IGERT would be used for activities related to energy 

research and development. 

Section 4 would provide similar authority to the Secretary of Energy to transfer funds to NSF programs that improve undergraduate and graduate education in engineering and architecture. 

Funds transferred under this authority would be used to develop 

curricula, implement laboratory activities and training, and design 

projects related to the design and construction of high-performance 

buildings. 

While H.R. 1716 would provide the authority to transfer funds 

from the Department of Energy to NSF, the bill would not authorize any additional appropriations and thus would not affect the 

total amount available to be spent. CBO expects that the transfer 

of any funds under the legislation would not significantly change 

the rate of expenditure of those funds—either of funds already appropriated (which would be direct spending) or of sums that would 

be appropriated in the future. As such, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1716 would have no significant effect on outlays over 

the next five years. 

H.R. 1716 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. The bill 

would benefit public institutions of higher education that participate in activities to develop undergraduate and graduate curricula 

for interdisciplinary engineering and architecture education. Any 

costs those institutions might incur would result from complying 

with conditions of federal assistance. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Daniel Hoople. This 

estimate was approved by Robert A. Sunshine, Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 

XI. COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

H.R. 1716 contains no unfunded mandates. 

XII. COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The oversight findings and recommendations of the Committee 

on Science and Technology are reflected in the body of this report. 

XIII. STATEMENT ON GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause (3)(c) of House rule XIII, the goals of H.R. 

1716 are to support higher education curriculum development and 

graduate training in advanced energy and green building technologies. 

XIV. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States 

grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 1716. 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
6 

XV. FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

H.R. 1716 does not establish nor authorize the establishment of 

any advisory committee. 

XVI. CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

The Committee finds that H.R. 1716 does not relate to the terms 

and conditions of employment or access to public services or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104–1). 

XVII. EARMARK IDENTIFICATION

H.R. 1716 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), 

or 9(f) of Rule XXI. 

XVIII. STATEMENT ON PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL, OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any state, local, or tribal law. 

XIX. CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

None. 

XX. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

On May 23, 2007, the Committee on Science and Technology favorably reported H.R. 1716 and recommended its enactment. 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
(7) 

XXI. PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP ON H.R. 1716, THE GREEN 

ENERGY EDUCATION ACT OF 2007 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 23, 2007 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:10 a.m., in Room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Bart Gordon 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman GORDON. Good morning everyone. The Committee on 

Science and Technology will come to order. Pursuant to notice, the 

Committee meets to consider the following measures: H.R. 364, To 

provide for the establishment of the Advanced Research Projects 

Agency–Energy; H.R. 1467, the 10,000 Trained by 2010 Act; H.R. 

1716, the Green Energy Education of 2007; and H.R. 632, the H– 

Prize Act of 2007. 

Before we get started with this markup though, we have one 

quick piece of Committee business to attend to. The distinguished 

Member from California, Mr. Calvert, recently took a leave of absence from the Committee to serve on Appropriations. This left the 

Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee without a Ranking Member. 

Last week Mr. Hall announced that Representative Feeney would 

take over as Ranking Member of the Subcommittee, and I now ask 

unanimous consent that the Committee on Science and Technology 

ratify the selection of Mr. Feeney as Ranking Member of the Space 

and Aeronautics Subcommittee. Without objection—— 

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, do you have to be present to be proposed or—— 

Chairman GORDON. Well, I am considering that no objection 

and—or may I say, I consider that a slight objection and it is so 

ordered. I want to congratulate Mr. Feeney. 

Let me also say that Ken Calvert—I was Ranking Member of 

this committee and Ken did much more than I did. He made an 

effort to go to every facility all across the country and became very 

knowledgeable and we hope that he will be a continuing asset and 

I am sure that Mr. Feeney will also do a good job, but Ken did a 

particularly good job and hopefully he will be there on Appropriations to understand these issues. 

We now begin with the markup and I will begin with a brief 

statement. Today the Committee is marking up four bills. The first 

bill we will consider is a bill that I introduced, H.R. 364, which establishes the Advanced Research Project Agency for Energy, and in 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
8 

the Subcommittee hearing and in the markup we had a very 

healthy discussion that I believe pointed to the critical need for 

such an entity. We have worked hard with our friends from across 

the aisle, and while there are still a few differences, it has resulted 

in a better bill. It is my understanding that this discussion will 

continue today with a number of amendments, and I look forward 

to addressing those concerns. 

The next bill we will take up is H.R. 1467, the 10,000 Trained 

by 2010 Act, introduced by Chairman Wu. This is a good bill which 

I support. There has been a lot of talking in Washington about the 

need to push health care IT forward. Our medical system is far behind other sectors in the use of information technology. However, 

it is common knowledge that information technology could significantly improve patient care and reduce health care costs, and let 

me just collaterally say that I have just introduced H.R. 2406. It 

is a health care IT bill that will be in the jurisdiction of this committee. As I think Mr. Gingerich can tell you, it is going to be wildly popular within the health care area, doctors, physicians, everyone. Health care IT or IT in the health care area is one of the few 

areas that hasn’t really matured. It is so popular that Newt 

Gingerich and Hillary Clinton are supporting this concept and so 

I would suggest to all of you to take a look at it. Don’t get involved 

if you don’t want to but I think you will find that it will be something that is going to be a good bill and will be popular for you. 

And we also have H.R. 1716, the Green Energy Education Act of 

2007. It was introduced by Mr. McCaul, and H.R. 1716 raises the 

profile of a very important issue, university research and education 

on clean energy including energy efficiency and green building design and technologies. It would bring together the Department of 

Energy, a emission agency, and the National Science Foundation, 

which has a long history with science and technological education, 

in a common goal to help educate the next generation of energy 

technology experts and green building professionals. This bill helps 

meet a very important need, and I thank Mr. McCaul for bringing 

it to the Committee, and who would have known he would have 

been such a greenie. But we thank you. This is a good bill. 

We also will consider Mr. Lipinski’s and Mr. Inglis’ H.R. 362, the 

H–Prize Act of 2007. Hydrogen technology represents just the type 

of transformational possibilities that we are hoping to achieve with 

ARPA–E and may some day make an important piece of our energy 

puzzle, and I commend our colleagues, Mr. Inglis and Mr. Lipinski, 

for working together to make this a good bipartisan bill and I look 

forward to moving it through the Committee today. 

So these are the four good bills that we have before us and I now 

would like to recognize Mr. Hall to present his opening remarks. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Gordon follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BART GORDON

Today the Committee is meeting to markup four bills. 

The first bill we will consider today is a bill that I introduced, H.R. 364, which 

establishes an Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy. In the Subcommittee 

hearing and markup we had a very healthy discussion that, I believe, pointed to 

the critical need for such an entity. 

We have worked hard with our friends across the aisle. And, while there are still 

substantial differences, it has resulted in a better bill. It is my understanding that 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
9 

this discussion will continue today with a number of amendments, and I look forward to addressing your concerns. 

The next bill we will take up is H. R. 1467, the 10,000 Trained by 2010 Act introduced by Chairman Wu. This is a good bill which I support. 

There has been a lot of talk in Washington about the need to push health care 

IT forward. Our medical system is far behind other sectors in the use of information 

technology. However, it is common knowledge that information technology could significantly improve patient care and reduce health care costs. 

While there has been a lot of discussion on the issue in Congress, not much has 

actually been done. In this case, Chairman Wu and other Members of the Committee have identified one component of the issue and how the Science and Technology Committee could make a real and positive contribution in this area. 

I strongly support this legislation and would urge everyone on the Committee to 

do so as well. 

H.R. 1716, the Green Energy Education Act of 2007, was reintroduced by Mr. 

McCaul this year after having passed the House as part of a broader bipartisan 

Science Committee Energy R&D bill at the end of the 109th Congress. 

H.R. 1716 raises the profile of a very important issue—university research and 

education on clean energy, including energy efficiency and green building design 

and technologies. It would bring together the Department of Energy, a mission 

agency, and the National Science Foundation, which has a long history with science 

and technology education, in a common goal to help educate the next generation of 

energy technology experts and green building professionals. 

This bill helps meet a very important need and I thank Mr. McCaul for bringing 

it to the Committee. 

We will also consider by Mr. Lipinski, H.R. 632, the H–Prize Act of 2007. Hydrogen technologies represent just the type of transformational possibilities that we are 

hoping to achieve with ARPA–E, and may some day make up an important piece 

of our energy puzzle. 

I commend my colleagues Mr. Inglis and Mr. Lipinski for working together and 

for working hard to make this a good, bipartisan bill. I look forward to moving it 

through Committee today. 

These are four good bills, and I strongly encourage my colleagues to support all 

of them. 

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, you and I have been working together 

now for over 22 years and on the same side of the aisle for most 

of that time, and if it weren’t for me switching parties you might 

not even be Chairman right now, and I have been talked to by 4/ 

5 of you bunch asking me to switch back. A good group on both 

sides. I appreciate everybody on both sides of the Chairman here, 

and you can thank me later if you would like. 

When you work with someone as long as we have, not only on 

this committee but also on the Commerce Committee—we are on 

that Committee together—there are bound to be some times when 

we are going to disagree, and as much as I dislike going against 

my friend from Tennessee, sometimes it just happens. As it turns 

out, today is one of those days. While I commend you, Bart, for 

your efforts on behalf of boosting energy R&D, I disagree with the 

way H.R. 364 does it. I have to say that I have a problem with the 

idea of creating a new bureaucracy within the Department of Energy that will regardless of intention fight for money with existing 

and future programs at DOE. With the tight budget parameters we 

are working with, I am not comfortable authorizing the creation of 

ARPA–E based on a vague recommendation that was in the Gathering Storm report. The facts are that DOE currently has the authority to do ARPA-type projects but DOE is woefully under-funded. I am concerned that we could be faced with the problem of having both the Office of Science and ARPA–E underfunded so that 

neither of them is operating at full potential if we go forward with 

the creation of this new agency, and before we go forward with any 

ARPA-type projects, I would like the Section 1821 study in EPAct 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
10 

to be completed that looks at the applicability of the DARPA management practices and the advisability of creating a DARPA-type 

agency within DOE before we move toward this legislation, and to 

that end, I will be introducing an amendment that without creating 

a new bureaucracy would require the Secretary of Energy to identify and accelerate advanced research projects at the DOE that will 

address our energy needs. I along with several of my colleagues 

have sent a letter to the Secretary urging him to complete the 

study as mandated by law so that we all might benefit from its recommendations. 

In addition to the letter, we also ask the Secretary to appoint a 

technology transfer coordinator and establish the technology transfer working group. As several of our witnesses testified to in our 

committee hearing, technology transfer plays a very integral part 

in the process from basic research to widespread commercialization. I don’t think anyone would dispute that our country needs 

clean, affordable, reliable energy that is generated through research and development. This committee should continue to advance legislation that addresses our most critical energy needs in 

a fiscally responsible manner. To that end, I will be introducing 

legislation by the end of the week that will help accomplish these 

goals. 

In addition to the ARPA–E legislation, we will also be marking 

up H.R. 1467, H.R. 1716 and H.R. 632. I am an original co-sponsor 

of H.R. 1467, the 10,000 Trained by 2010 Act, and I am supportive 

of the primary goal it seeks to achieve. If implemented correctly 

and efficiently, health information technology can revolutionize our 

health care system but we have to have an educated workforce 

properly trained in health IT in order for it to be successful, and 

this is what H.R. 1467 is about. NSF is already doing work, yeoman’s work in the IT arena but this measure will increase the 

focus on health IT. I encourage my colleagues to support it. 

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1716, the Green Energy 

Education Act of 2007, introduced by my fellow Texan, Mr. McCaul. 

This is a good piece of legislation. It was voted out of this committee in the last Congress. The fact that it has also been included 

in larger packages on both sides of the aisle in this Congress indicates its overwhelming support. Simply put, this measure encourages the Department of Energy to work with the National Science 

Foundation to help develop the next generation of engineers and 

architects to work effectively together to produce buildings that will 

incorporate the latest in energy-efficient technologies. I commend 

Mr. McCaul for his fine work on this bill. 

Finally, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 632, the H–Prize 

Act, sponsored by Inglis and Lipinski. This legislation was introduced in the last Congress and passed overwhelmingly by the 

House of Representatives. This bill directs the Secretary of Energy 

to award competitive cash prizes biannually to advance the research, development, demonstration and commercial applications of 

hydrogen energy technologies. Categories eligible for prizes include 

advancements in certain hydrogen components or systems, prototypes of hydrogen-powered vehicles and transformational changes 

in the technologies for hydrogen distribution or production. I comVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:32 Jun 06, 2007 Jkt 059006 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR173.XXX HR173

hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
11 

mend Mr. Inglis and Mr. Lipinski for introducing this legislation 

and I encourage my colleagues to support it. 

Once again, Mr. Chairman, I am happy to be supportive of these 

three bipartisan pieces of legislation. I look forward to working 

with you to advance these bills. 

I yield back my time, sir. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hall follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE RALPH M. HALL

Mr. Chairman, you and I have been working together for over 22 years now—and 

on the same side of the aisle for most of that time. Why, if it weren’t for me switching parties, you might not be the chairman right now! You can thank me later. . .. 

When you work with someone as long as we have, not only on this committee, but 

also on the Commerce Committee, there are bound to be times when we’re going 

to disagree, and as much as I dislike going against my good friend from Tennessee, 

sometimes it just happens. As it turns out, today is one of those days. While I commend my friend for his efforts on behalf of boosting energy R&D, I disagree with 

the way H.R. 364 does it. I have to say that I have a problem with the idea of creating a new bureaucracy within the Department of Energy that will, regardless of 

intention, fight for money with existing and future programs at DOE. With the tight 

budget parameters we are working with, I am not comfortable authorizing the creation of ARPA–E based on a vague recommendation that was in the Gathering 

Storm report. 

The facts are that DOE currently has the authority to do ARPA-type projects, but 

DOE is woefully under funded. I am concerned that we could be faced with the problem of having both the Office of Science and ARPA–E under funded so that neither 

of them is operating at its full potential if we go forward with creating this new 

agency. Before we go forward with any ARPA-type projects, I would like the Section 

1821 study in EPACT to be completed that looks at the applicability of the DARPA 

management 

practices and the advisability of creating a DARPA-type agency within DOE before moving forward with legislation. To that end I will be introducing an amendment that, without creating a new bureaucracy, would require the Secretary of Energy to identify and accelerate advanced research projects at the DOE that will address our energy needs. I, along with several of my colleagues, have sent a letter 

to the Secretary urging him to complete the study as mandated by law so that we 

all may benefit from its recommendations. In addition, in the letter we also ask the 

Secretary to appoint the Technology Transfer Coordinator and establish the Technology Transfer Working Group. As several of our witnesses testified to in our Subcommittee hearing, technology transfer plays an integral part in the process from 

basic research to widespread commercialization. 

I don’t think anyone would dispute that our country needs clean, affordable, reliable energy that is generated through research and development. This committee 

should continue to advance legislation that addresses our most critical energy needs 

in a fiscally responsible manner. To that end, I will be introducing legislation by 

the end of this week that will help accomplish these goals. 

In addition to the ARPA–E legislation we will also be marking up H.R. 1467, H.R. 

1716, and H.R. 632. I am an original co-sponsor of H.R. 1467, the 10,000 Trained 

by 2010 Act, and am supportive of the primary goal it seeks to achieve. If implemented correctly and efficiently, health information technology (IT) can revolutionize our health care system. But, we must have an educated workforce, properly 

trained in health IT, in order for it to be successful. This is what H.R. 1467 is about. 

NSF is already doing work yeoman’s work in the IT arena, but this measure will 

increase the focus on health IT. I encourage my colleagues to support it. 

I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1716, the Green Energy Education Act of 

2007, introduced my fellow Texan, Mr. McCaul. This is a good piece of legislation 

that was voted out of this committee in the last Congress. The fact that it is also 

being included in larger energy packages on both sides of the aisle in this Congress 

indicates its overwhelming support. Simply put, this measure encourages the Department of Energy to work with the National Science Foundation to help develop 

the next generation of engineers and architects to work effectively together to 

produce buildings that incorporate the latest in energy efficient technologies. I commend Mr. McCaul for his fine work on this bill. 

Finally, I also urge my colleagues to support H.R. 632, the H–Prize Act sponsored 

by Inglis and Lipinski. This legislation was introduced in the last Congress and 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
12 

passed overwhelmingly by the House of Representatives. The bill directs the Secretary of Energy to award competitive cash prizes biennially to advance the research, development, demonstration, and commercial application of hydrogen energy 

technologies. Categories eligible for prizes include advancements in certain hydrogen components or systems, prototypes of hydrogen-powered vehicles, and transformational changes in technologies for hydrogen distribution or production. I commend Mr. Inglis and Mr. Lipinski for introducing this legislation, and I encourage 

my colleagues to support it. 

Once again, Mr. Chairman, I am happy to be supportive of these three bipartisan 

pieces of legislation and look forward to working with you to advance these bills. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Mr. Hall. As you have pointed 

out, we have had a good working relationship and I will point out 

that every bill that has come out of this committee has been unanimous and the only—one bill received 21 negative votes on the 

Floor. That is the worst we have done on the Floor. We are going 

to have I hope three unanimous bills today and I think the reason 

that we have been able to do this is, we have started with good 

bills. We have had extensive consultation and by making better 

bills. At the end of the day we are going to have our first disagreement but I think two things will happen: We are going to have 

amendments today that will make the bill even better and I think 

at the end of the day that it will be a bipartisan bill but it won’t 

be a unanimous bill, and we will try to proceed without kicking or 

scratching and we will get this done. So without objection, Members may place statements in the record at this point. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Mitchell follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE HARRY E. MITCHELL

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Today we are considering several bills to decrease our dependence on foreign oil 

and encourage renewable sources of energy. 

As the world leader in emissions of greenhouse gasses, it is imperative that we 

as a nation actively pursue the means to reduce those emissions. We have an obligation to lead the world toward a solution. One way to accomplish this is to invest 

in alternative energy sources. 

The bills before us today would put in place necessary components to take us 

where we need to be as a nation including education and training, monetary incentives, and fast acting, responsive research programs. 

The United States must lead by example and invest in clean, renewable energy 

sources. 

Today, we are considering several bills to address this issue and I look forward 

to working on them. 

Sustainable energy is an issue that affects our environment, our economy, and our 

national security, and we cannot leave this problem for future generations of Americans to solve. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman GORDON. We will now consider H.R. 1716, the Green 

Energy Education Act of 2007. 

I recognize Mr. McCaul for five minutes to describe the bill. 

Mr. MCCAUL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to first thank 

you for including my bill in today’s markup and commend you for 

your bipartisan leadership on this committee. And I also want to 

thank Mr. Hill for working on this legislation. 

My hometown of Austin, Texas, is a green energy kind of town, 

and I am proud of that. Like many other Members of this committee I am concerned about America’s dependence on foreign 

sources of energy. One of the ways that we can reduce the need for 

energy imports is to use our energy more efficiently. Buildings conVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:32 Jun 06, 2007 Jkt 059006 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR173.XXX HR173

hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
13 

sume more energy than any other sector of the economy, including 

industry and transportation. According to the U.S. Department of 

Energy U.S. buildings consume 39 percent of our nation’s primary 

energy and 70 percent of electricity. 

However, energy efficient building practices are still at the 

fringes of the building sector, in part because of the lack of awareness about energy efficient technologies and design practices among 

building professionals. That is why I introduced the Green Energy 

Education Act. This legislation authorizes the Department of Energy to partner with the National Science Foundation to support 

graduate education and curriculum development to advance DOE’s 

broad energy technology development mission. 

Working through NSF, DOE will help develop the next generation of engineers and architects to produce buildings incorporating 

the latest in energy efficient technologies. In order to reduce the 

likelihood of duplicative and wasteful programs, this bill allows the 

Department of Energy and National Science Foundation to combine 

their efforts to find workable solutions to the issues surrounding 

building efficiency that can be transferred to the marketplace. 

Specifically, H.R. 1716 will authorize DOE’s Office of Science and 

Applied Energy Technology Programs to contribute funds to NSF’s 

successful Integrative Graduate Education and Research Training 

Program, which is already doing great work in this area. 

This bill also authorizes the Department of Energy to contribute 

to NSF’s curriculum development activities in order to improve the 

ability of engineers and architects to design and construct more efficient and durable buildings. 

I urge my colleagues to support this important step towards increasing America’s energy independence, and I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. McCaul follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL T. MCCAUL

I would like to thank you for including this bill in today’s markup and would also 

like to thank Mr. Hill for working with me on this legislation. 

Like many other Members of this committee, I am concerned about America’s dependence on foreign sources of energy. One of the ways that we can reduce the need 

for energy imports is to use our energy more efficiently. 

Buildings consume more energy than any other sector of the economy, including 

industry and transportation. According to U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. buildings consume 39 percent of our nation’s primary energy and 70 percent of electricity. 

However, energy efficient building practices are still at the fringes of the building 

sector, in part because of a lack of awareness about energy efficient technologies and 

design practices among building professionals. 

This is why I introduced the Green Energy Education Act. This legislation authorizes DOE to partner with the National Science Foundation to support graduate education and curriculum development to advance DOE’s broad energy technology development mission. Working through NSF, DOE will help develop the next generation of engineers and architects to produce buildings incorporating the latest in energy efficient technologies. 

In order to reduce the likelihood of duplicative and wasteful programs, this bill 

allows the Department of Energy and National Science Foundation to combine their 

efforts to find workable solutions to the issues surrounding building efficiency that 

can be transferred to the marketplace. 

Specifically, H.R. 1716 will authorize DOE’s Office of Science and applied energy 

technology programs to contribute funds to NSF’s successful Integrative Graduate 

Education and Research Traineeship program, which is already doing good work in 

this area. 

This bill also authorizes the DOE to contribute to NSF’s curriculum development 

activities, in order to improve the ability of engineers and architects to design and 

construct more efficient and durable buildings. 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
14 

I urge my colleagues to support this important step towards increasing America’s 

energy independence. 

I yield back. 

Chairman GORDON. Thank you, Mr. McCaul, and thank you for 

bringing us a good bill. We will get this to the Floor at the earlier 

possible time. 

Does anyone else wish to be recognized. 

I ask unanimous consent that the bill is considered as read and 

open to amendment at any point, and that the Members proceed 

with the amendments in the order of the roster. Without objection 

so ordered. 

The first amendment on the roster is offered by the gentleman 

from Texas, Mr. McCaul. Are you ready to proceed with your 

amendment? 

Mr. MCCAUL. I am, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the 

desk. 

Chairman GORDON. The Clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 1716 offered by Mr. McCaul of 

Texas. 

Chairman GORDON. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 

the reading. Without objection, so ordered. 

The gentleman is recognized for five minutes to explain the 

amendment. 

Mr. MCCAUL. I won’t take nearly that amount of time. It is a 

very simple amendment that clarifies that landscape architects will 

be eligible for the programs created in this bill. By designing the 

environment around a building with the goal of energy efficiency 

in mind, landscape architects have helped find new and innovative 

ways of reducing energy consumption. Landscape architects clearly 

have an important role to play in the research that the Green Energy Education Act promotes. 

So I urge the adoption of this amendment, and I yield back the 

balance of my time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. McCaul follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL T. MCCAUL

This is a very simple amendment that clarifies that landscape architects will be 

eligible for the programs created in this bill. By designing the environment around 

a building with the goal of energy efficiency in mind, landscape architects have 

helped find new and innovative ways of reducing energy consumption. 

Landscape architects clearly have an important role to play in the research that 

the Green Energy Education Act promotes, and so I urge the adoption of this amendment. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman GORDON. Is there further discussion on the amendment? If not, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say 

aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes have it, and the amendment is 

agreed to. 

Are there other amendments? Hearing none, the vote is on the 

bill, H.R. 1716 as amended. All those in favor will say aye. All 

those opposed will say no. In the opinion of the Chair the ayes have 

it. 

I recognize Mr. Hall to offer a motion. 

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee favorably 

report H.R. 1716 as amended to the House with the recommendaVerDate Aug 31 2005 07:32 Jun 06, 2007 Jkt 059006 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\HR173.XXX HR173

hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
15 

tion that the bill do pass. Furthermore, I move that the staff be instructed to make necessary technical and conforming changes and 

that the Chairman take all the necessary steps to bring the bill before the House for consideration. 

I yield back. 

Chairman GORDON. The question is on the motion to report the 

bill favorably. Those in favor of the motion will signify by saying 

aye. Opposed no. The ayes have it. The bill is reported favorably. 

Without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. 

I move that Members have two subsequent calendar days in which 

to submit supplemental, minority, or additional views on the measure. 

I move pursuant to Clause 1 of Rule 22 of the House of Representatives that the Committee authorize the Chairman to offer 

such motions as may be necessary in the House to adopt and pass 

H.R. 1716, the Green Energy Education Act of 2007, as amended. 

Without objection, so ordered. Let me again, I want to thank the 

hard core for staying here. We have one more to go. We are going 

to have votes about 1:00. We are going to be right under the gun 

here. 

Many thanks to everyone, and I want to conclude this markup. 

[Whereupon, at 1:00 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT

hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
(17) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 1716, SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF H.R. 1716, 

AMENDMENT ROSTER


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
18 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPThr1716a.eps
19 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPThr1716b.eps
20 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPThr1716c.eps
21 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF H.R. 1716, 

GREEN ENERGY EDUCATION ACT OF 2007 

SEC. 1. SHORT TITLE—‘Green Energy Education Act of 2007’ 

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS—Provides definitions for terms used in this Act. 

SEC. 3. GRADUATE TRAINING IN ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT—Authorizes Department of Energy (DOE) to contribute funds to the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Integrative Graduate Education and Research 

Traineeship (IGERT) program in support of projects related to energy research, development, demonstration and commercial application. 

SEC. 4. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT FOR HIGH PERFORMANCE 

BUILDING DESIGN—Authorizes DOE’s high performance buildings technologies 

programs to contribute to NSF’s ongoing curriculum development activities for the 

purpose of improving undergraduate and graduate interdisciplinary engineering and 

architecture education related to the design and construction of high performance 

buildings. Requires the Director of NSF to consult with the Secretary of Energy in 

awarding grants for this purpose. Gives priority to applications for schools, departments, or programs of engineering that are partnered with schools, departments or 

programs of design, architecture and city, regional, or urban planning. 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPT
22 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPThr1716d.eps
23 


hmoore on PRODPC68 with HMRPThr1716e.eps