59–006 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 110–171 

H-PRIZE ACT OF 2007 

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

the Union and ordered to 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. 632] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Science and Technology, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 632) to authorize the Secretary of Energy to 

establish monetary prizes for achievements in overcoming scientific 

and technical barriers associated with hydrogen energy, having 

considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment 

and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. 

CONTENTS 

Page 

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

II. Purpose of the Bill ...................................................................................... 5 

III. Background and Need for the Legislation ................................................ 5 

IV. Hearing Summary ....................................................................................... 6 

V. Committee Actions ...................................................................................... 8 

VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill, As Reported ........................... 8 

VII. Section-by-Section Analysis (by Title and Section), As Reported ............ 9 

VIII. Committee View .......................................................................................... 11 

IX. Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. 12 

X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate ............................................. 12 

XI Compliance with Public Law 104–4 .......................................................... 13 

XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations ........................... 13 

XIII. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives ...................... 13 

XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement .......................................................... 14 

XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement ................................................... 14 

XVI. Congressional Accountability Act .............................................................. 14 

XVII Earmark Identification ............................................................................... 14 

XVIII. Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law ........................ 14 

XIX. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported ........................ 14 

XX. Committee Recommendations .................................................................... 14 

XXI. Proceedings of the Subcommittee Markup ................................................ 15 

XXII. Proceedings of the Full Committee Markup ............................................. 41 

I. AMENDMENT

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

2 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘H-Prize Act of 2007’’. 

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act: 

(1) ADMINISTERING ENTITY.—The term ‘‘administering entity’’ means the entity with which the Secretary enters into an agreement under section 3(c). 

(2) DEPARTMENT.—The term ‘‘Department’’ means the Department of Energy. 

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

SEC. 3. PRIZE AUTHORITY. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall carry out a program to competitively award 

cash prizes in conformity with this Act to advance the research, development, demonstration, and commercial application of hydrogen energy technologies. 

(b) ADVERTISING AND SOLICITATION OF COMPETITORS.—

(1) ADVERTISING.—The Secretary shall widely advertise prize competitions to 

encourage broad participation, including by individuals, universities (including 

historically Black colleges and universities and other minority serving institutions), and large and small businesses (including businesses owned or controlled 

by socially and economically disadvantaged persons). 

(2) ANNOUNCEMENT THROUGH FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE.—The Secretary 

shall announce each prize competition by publishing a notice in the Federal 

Register. This notice shall include essential elements of the competition such as 

the subject of the competition, the duration of the competition, the eligibility requirements for participation in the competition, the process for participants to 

register for the competition, the amount of the prize, and the criteria for awarding the prize. 

(c) ADMINISTERING THE COMPETITIONS.—The Secretary shall enter into an agreement with a private, nonprofit entity to administer the prize competitions, subject 

to the provisions of this Act. The duties of the administering entity under the agreement shall include—

(1) advertising prize competitions and their results; 

(2) raising funds from private entities and individuals to pay for administrative costs and to contribute to cash prizes, including funds provided in exchange 

for the right to name a prize awarded under this section; 

(3) developing, in consultation with and subject to the final approval of the 

Secretary, the criteria for selecting winners in prize competitions, based on 

goals provided by the Secretary; 

(4) determining, in consultation with the Secretary, the appropriate amount 

and funding sources for each prize to be awarded, subject to the final approval 

of the Secretary with respect to Federal funding; 

(5) providing advice and consultation to the Secretary on the selection of 

judges in accordance with section 4(d), using criteria developed in consultation 

with and subject to the final approval of the Secretary; and 

(6) protecting against the entity’s unauthorized use or disclosure of a registered participant’s trade secrets and confidential business information. Any information properly identified as trade secrets or confidential business information that is submitted by a participant as part of a competitive program under 

this Act may be withheld from public disclosure. 

(d) FUNDING SOURCES.—Prizes under this Act shall consist of Federal appropriated funds and any funds provided by the administering entity (including funds 

raised pursuant to subsection (c)(2)) for such cash prize programs. The Secretary 

may accept funds from other Federal agencies for such cash prizes and, notwithstanding section 3302(b) of title 31, United States Code, may use such funds for the 

cash prize program. Other than publication of the names of prize sponsors, the Secretary may not give any special consideration to any private sector entity or individual in return for a donation to the Secretary or administering entity. 

(e) ANNOUNCEMENT OF PRIZES.—The Secretary may not issue a notice required by 

subsection (b)(2) until all the funds needed to pay out the announced amount of the 

prize have been appropriated or committed in writing by the administering entity. 

The Secretary may increase the amount of a prize after an initial announcement 

is made under subsection (b)(2) if—

(1) notice of the increase is provided in the same manner as the initial notice 

of the prize; and 

(2) the funds needed to pay out the announced amount of the increase have 

been appropriated or committed in writing by the administering entity. 

(f) SUNSET.—The authority to announce prize competitions under this Act shall 

terminate on September 30, 2018. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

3 

SEC. 4. PRIZE CATEGORIES. 

(a) CATEGORIES.—The Secretary shall establish prizes for—

(1) advancements in technologies, components, or systems related to—

(A) hydrogen production; 

(B) hydrogen storage; 

(C) hydrogen distribution; and 

(D) hydrogen utilization; 

(2) prototypes of hydrogen-powered vehicles or other hydrogen-based products 

that best meet or exceed objective performance criteria, such as completion of 

a race over a certain distance or terrain or generation of energy at certain levels 

of efficiency; and 

(3) transformational changes in technologies for the distribution or production 

of hydrogen that meet or exceed far-reaching objective criteria, which shall include minimal carbon emissions and which may include cost criteria designed 

to facilitate the eventual market success of a winning technology. 

(b) AWARDS.—

(1) ADVANCEMENTS.—To the extent permitted under section 3(e), the prizes 

authorized under subsection (a)(1) shall be awarded biennially to the most significant advance made in each of the four subcategories described in subparagraphs (A) through (D) of subsection (a)(1) since the submission deadline of the 

previous prize competition in the same category under subsection (a)(1) or the 

date of enactment of this Act, whichever is later, unless no such advance is significant enough to merit an award. No one such prize may exceed $1,000,000. 

If less than $4,000,000 is available for a prize competition under subsection 

(a)(1), the Secretary may omit one or more subcategories, reduce the amount of 

the prizes, or not hold a prize competition. 

(2) PROTOTYPES.—To the extent permitted under section 3(e), prizes authorized under subsection (a)(2) shall be awarded biennially in alternate years from 

the prizes authorized under subsection (a)(1). The Secretary is authorized to 

award up to one prize in this category in each 2-year period. No such prize may 

exceed $4,000,000. If no registered participants meet the objective performance 

criteria established pursuant to subsection (c) for a competition under this paragraph, the Secretary shall not award a prize. 

(3) TRANSFORMATIONAL TECHNOLOGIES.—To the extent permitted under section 3(e), the Secretary shall announce one prize competition authorized under 

subsection (a)(3) as soon after the date of enactment of this Act as is practicable. A prize offered under this paragraph shall be not less than $10,000,000, 

paid to the winner in a lump sum, and an additional amount paid to the winner 

as a match for each dollar of private funding raised by the winner for the hydrogen technology beginning on the date the winner was named. The match shall 

be provided for 3 years after the date the prize winner is named or until the 

full amount of the prize has been paid out, whichever occurs first. A prize winner may elect to have the match amount paid to another entity that is continuing the development of the winning technology. The Secretary shall announce the rules for receiving the match in the notice required by section 

3(b)(2). The Secretary shall award a prize under this paragraph only when a 

registered participant has met the objective criteria established for the prize 

pursuant to subsection (c) and announced pursuant to section 3(b)(2). Not more 

than $10,000,000 in Federal funds may be used for the prize award under this 

paragraph. The administering entity shall seek to raise $40,000,000 toward the 

matching award under this paragraph. 

(c) CRITERIA.—In establishing the criteria required by this Act, the Secretary—

(1) shall consult with the Department’s Hydrogen Technical and Fuel Cell Advisory Committee; 

(2) shall consult with other Federal agencies, including the National Science 

Foundation; and 

(3) may consult with other experts such as private organizations, including 

professional societies, industry associations, and the National Academy of 

Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. 

(d) JUDGES.—For each prize competition, the Secretary in consultation with the 

administering entity shall assemble a panel of qualified judges to select the winner 

or winners on the basis of the criteria established under subsection (c). Judges for 

each prize competition shall include individuals from outside the Department, including from the private sector. A judge, spouse, minor children, and members of 

the judge’s household may not—

(1) have personal or financial interests in, or be an employee, officer, director, 

or agent of, any entity that is a registered participant in the prize competition 

for which he or she will serve as a judge; or 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

4 

(2) have a familial or financial relationship with an individual who is a registered participant in the prize competition for which he or she will serve as 

a judge. 

SEC. 5. ELIGIBILITY. 

To be eligible to win a prize under this Act, an individual or entity— (1) shall have complied with all the requirements in accordance with the Federal Register notice required under section 3(b)(2); 

(2) in the case of a private entity, shall be incorporated in and maintain a 

primary place of business in the United States, and in the case of an individual, 

whether participating singly or in a group, shall be a citizen of, or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in, the United States; and 

(3) shall not be a Federal entity, a Federal employee acting within the scope 

of his employment, or an employee of a national laboratory acting within the 

scope of his employment. 

SEC. 6. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. 

The Federal Government shall not, by virtue of offering or awarding a prize under 

this Act, be entitled to any intellectual property rights derived as a consequence of, 

or direct relation to, the participation by a registered participant in a competition 

authorized by this Act. This section shall not be construed to prevent the Federal 

Government from negotiating a license for the use of intellectual property developed 

for a prize competition under this Act. 

SEC. 7. LIABILITY. 

(a) WAIVER OF LIABILITY.—The Secretary may require registered participants to 

waive claims against the Federal Government and the administering entity (except 

claims for willful misconduct) for any injury, death, damage, or loss of property, revenue, or profits arising from the registered participants’ participation in a competition under this Act. The Secretary shall give notice of any waiver required under 

this subsection in the notice required by section 3(b)(2). The Secretary may not require a registered participant to waive claims against the administering entity arising out of the unauthorized use or disclosure by the administering entity of the registered participant’s trade secrets or confidential business information. 

(b) LIABILITY INSURANCE.—

(1) REQUIREMENTS.—Registered participants shall be required to obtain liability insurance or demonstrate financial responsibility, in amounts determined by 

the Secretary, for claims by—

(A) a third party for death, bodily injury, or property damage or loss resulting from an activity carried out in connection with participation in a 

competition under this Act; and 

(B) the Federal Government for damage or loss to Government property 

resulting from such an activity. 

(2) FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INSURED.—The Federal Government shall be 

named as an additional insured under a registered participant’s insurance policy required under paragraph (1)(A), and registered participants shall be required to agree to indemnify the Federal Government against third party claims 

for damages arising from or related to competition activities. 

SEC. 8. REPORT TO CONGRESS. 

Not later than 60 days after the awarding of the first prize under this Act, and 

annually thereafter, the Secretary shall transmit to the Congress a report that—

(1) identifies each award recipient; 

(2) describes the technologies developed by each award recipient; and 

(3) specifies actions being taken toward commercial application of all technologies with respect to which a prize has been awarded under this Act. 

SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

(a) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—

(1) AWARDS.—There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for the 

period encompassing fiscal years 2008 through 2017 for carrying out this Act—

(A) $20,000,000 for awards described in section (4)(a)(1); 

(B) $20,000,000 for awards described in section 4(a)(2); and 

(C) $10,000,000 for the award described in section 4(a)(3). 

(2) ADMINISTRATION.—In addition to the amounts authorized in paragraph (1), 

there are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for each of fiscal years 

2008 and 2009 $2,000,000 for the administrative costs of carrying out this Act. 

(b) CARRYOVER OF FUNDS.—Funds appropriated for prize awards under this Act 

shall remain available until expended, and may be transferred, reprogrammed, or 

expended for other purposes only after the expiration of 10 fiscal years after the fiscal year for which the funds were originally appropriated. No provision in this Act 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

5 

permits obligation or payment of funds in violation of section 1341 of title 31 of the 

United States Code (commonly referred to as the Anti-Deficiency Act). 

SEC. 10. NONSUBSTITUTION. 

The programs created under this Act shall not be considered a substitute for Federal research and development programs. 

II. PURPOSE

The purpose of the bill is to authorize the Secretary of Energy 

to establish monetary prizes for achievements in overcoming scientific and technical barriers associated with hydrogen energy. 

III. BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

Hydrogen gas is considered by many experts to be a promising 

fuel, particularly in the transportation sector. When used as a fuel, 

its only combustion byproduct is water vapor. The widespread 

adoption of hydrogen as a transportation fuel has the potential to 

reduce or eliminate air pollution generated by cars and trucks. 

However, unlike coal or oil, the hydrogen gas used as a fuel is 

not a naturally occurring energy resource. Hydrogen must be produced from hydrogen-bearing compounds, like water or natural gas, 

and that requires energy—and, unlike gasoline or biofuels, more 

energy is always required to produce it than is recovered when hydrogen is burned in a fuel cell. Hydrogen has the potential to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil, but the degree to which 

hydrogen will displace foreign energy supplies depends on what energy source is used to generate hydrogen gas in the first place. 

If hydrogen can be produced economically from energy sources 

that do not release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere—from renewable sources such as wind power or solar power, from nuclear 

power, or possibly from coal with carbon sequestration, then the 

widespread use of hydrogen as a fuel could make a major contribution to reducing the emission of greenhouse gases. 

While the promise of hydrogen is great, so are the technical challenges. Experts suggest that major advances will be required across 

a wide range of technologies for hydrogen to be affordable, safe, 

cleanly produced, and readily distributed. The production, storage, 

and use of hydrogen all present significant technical challenges. 

While Department of Energy (DOE) research programs have produced promising advances, much work must still be done to meet 

the goal of developing economically viable hydrogen technologies. 

Prizes are one tool the Federal government can employ to stimulate efforts to overcome such technical hurdles. A 1999 National 

Academy of Engineering (NAE) panel examining the use of prizes 

by federal agencies suggested the following design principles for 

prize programs: 

1. Treatment of intellectual property resulting from prize contests should be properly aligned with the objectives and incentive 

structure of the prize contest. 

2. Contest rules should be seen as transparent, simple, fair, 

and unbiased. 

3. Prizes should be commensurate with the effort required and 

goals sought. 

The Act establishes three types of prizes that are in keeping with 

the principles laid out by the NAE: 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

6 

1. Biennial prizes for advancements in each of hydrogen storage, hydrogen production, hydrogen use and hydrogen distribution; 

2. A goal-oriented, biennial contest for prototypes that meet objective contest criteria established in advance; and 

3. A prize of at least $10 million for a goal-oriented contest for 

the best invention that leads to transformational changes in the 

distribution or production of hydrogen. Winners of this prize could 

also receive matching funds for every dollar of private funding 

raised by the winner for commercialization of their winning technology. 

IV. HEARING SUMMARY

On February 7, 2002, the House Committee on Science held a 

hearing titled The Future of DOE’s Automotive Research Programs. The hearing addressed the Administration’s newly announced FreedomCAR program, and examined how it compared 

with the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV) program. The Committee heard testimony from the Hon. David K. 

Garman, Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy, DOE; Dr. Vernon P. Roan, Vice Chair, National Research 

Council Panel on the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles 

and Professor and Director, Fuel Cell Laboratory, Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Florida at Gainesville; Dr. Daniel Sperling, Director, Institute of Transportation Studies and Professor of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of California at Davis; and Mr. Ross Witschonke, Vice President of Electrics and Power Electronics, Ballard Power. 

On June 24, 2002, the Energy Subcommittee of the House Committee on Science held a hearing titled Fuel Cells: The Key to Energy Independence? The hearing focused on developments in hydrogen fuel cell R&D and in the fuel cell business, and provided a 

broad overview of fuel cells for all applications, not just transportation. The Subcommittee heard testimony from Dr. Hermann 

Grunder, Director, Argonne National Laboratory; Mr. Robert Culver, Executive Director, United States Council for Automotive Research; Mr. Stan Borys, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Gas Technology Institute; Mr. Jeff Serfass, President, 

National Hydrogen Association; Mr. James Uihlein, Fuels Project 

Manager, BP; and Mr. Elias (Lee) Camara, Vice President, 

H2Fuels. 

On June 26, 2002, the Energy Subcommittee of the House Committee on Science held a hearing titled FreedomCAR: Getting New 

Technology into the Marketplace, which primarily solicited views 

on the best ways to proceed with automotive research and development (R&D) and how to integrate advanced technologies into production vehicles that can gain customer acceptance. One of the recurring questions was the ‘chicken and egg’ problem with hydrogen 

fuel cells, i.e., how can you establish an effective hydrogen infrastructure before there are great numbers of fuel cell vehicles? The 

Subcommittee heard testimony from Mr. Amory B. Lovins, Chief 

Executive Officer, Rocky Mountain Institute; Dr. Byron McCormick, Executive Director, Fuel Cell Activities, General Motors Corporation; Mr. Doug Rothwell, President and Chief Executive Officer, the Michigan Economic Development Corporation; Mr. Roger 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

7 

Saillant, President, Plug Power, Inc.; Mr. Robert Templin, Member 

of the Board of Directors, PAICE Corporation. 

On March 5, 2003, the House Committee on Science held a hearing titled The Path to a Hydrogen Economy on the President’s Hydrogen Initiative, which is intended to enable the transition to an 

economy powered by hydrogen. Witnesses testified that, if the 

widespread use of hydrogen is to become a reality, significant advances must be made, not only in vehicle technology, but also in 

hydrogen production and the infrastructure necessary to deliver it. 

The hearing focused on the barriers to a hydrogen economy, and 

how the President’s initiative might address those barriers. The 

Committee heard testimony from the Hon. David K. Garman, Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, 

DOE; Dr. Alan C. Lloyd, 2003 Chairman, California Fuel Cell Partnership; Dr. Joan Ogden, Research Scientist, Princeton Environmental Institute; Dr. Larry Burns, Vice President, Research, Development and Planning, General Motors Corporation; and Mr. Don 

Huberts, Chief Executive Officer, Shell Hydrogen. 

On March 3, 2004, the House Committee on Science held a hearing titled Reviewing the Hydrogen Fuels and FreedomCar Initiatives. Specifically, the hearing focused on two recent reports from 

the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the American Physical Society (APS) on DOE’s hydrogen initiatives, and the Administration’s response to the reports’ recommendations for changes to 

the Administration’s programs. The Committee heard testimony 

from the Hon. David K. Garman, Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy, DOE; Dr. Michael Ramage, 

Chair of the NAS Committee on Alternatives and Strategies for Future Hydrogen Production and Use; and Dr. Peter Eisenberger, 

Chair of the APS Panel on Public Affairs Energy Subcommittee. 

On July 20, 2005, the Energy and Research Subcommittees of 

the House Committee on Science held a joint hearing titled Funding the Future: On the Road to a Hydrogen Economy to examine 

the progress that had been made in hydrogen research since the 

launch of the President’s Hydrogen Initiative and the next steps 

the Federal government should take to best advance a hydrogen 

economy. The Subcommittees heard testimony from Mr. Douglas 

Faulkner, Acting Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, DOE; Dr. David Bodde, Director of Innovation and 

Public Policy, Clemson University International Center for Automotive Research; Mr. Mark Chernoby, Vice President for Advanced 

Vehicle Engineering, DaimlerChrysler Corporation; Dr. George 

Crabtree, Director, Materials Science Division, Argonne National 

Laboratory; and Dr. John Heywood, Director, Sloan Automotive 

Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 

On April 27, 2006, the House Committee on Science held a hearing titled H.R. 5143, the H-Prize Act of 2006. The Committee heard 

testimony from Mr. Phillip Baxley, President, Shell Hydrogen; Dr. 

David Bodde, Director of Innovation and Public Policy, Clemson 

University International Center for Automotive Research; Dr. Peter 

Diamandis, Chairman, X Prize Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to fostering innovation through the use of competitions; and Dr. David L. Greene, Corporate Fellow, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. All four witnesses expressed support for the creation of a hydrogen prize. Dr. Diamandis emphasized the ability of 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

8 

prizes to attract many times the value of the purse in private investment by generating excitement and publicity. He noted that it 

is important to formulate the goals and the size of each prize carefully, and that a prize needs to be properly sized to both attract attention and to efficiently employ the resources available. Dr. Bodde 

testified that the H-Prize program should operate with several 

principles in mind: the prizes must be offered reliably and for a period long enough to bring in new participants; funds must supplement rather than compete with the core hydrogen research funding; and administration of the prize program must carefully document its experience, learn from that experience, and adapt accordingly. Dr. Greene testified that creating the H-Prize cannot substitute for adequately funding research, development and demonstration. Mr. Baxley testified that prizes could bring additional 

participants into efforts to use hydrogen more widely and that finding the most efficient and marketable way to develop a prize is 

something the government is in the position to promote. Both Dr. 

Diamandis and Dr. Greene suggested that amendments to the bill 

could help clarify the division of duties between the Secretary and 

the private entity that would administer the prize. Several witnesses, in response to questions, also indicated that the prize program could be successful with a prize of less than $100 million. 

V. COMMITTEE ACTIONS

On January 23, 2007, Science and Technology Committee Vice 

Chairman Daniel Lipinski, for himself and Energy and Environment Subcommittee Ranking Member Robert Inglis, Research and 

Science Education Subcommittee Ranking Member Vernon Ehlers, 

Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, Rep. Michael McCaul, Rep. David 

Reichert and 20 other co-sponsors introduced H.R. 632, The HPrize Act of 2007. 

The Energy and Environment Subcommittee met on Thursday, 

May 10, 2007, to consider the bill. Mr. Inglis moved that the Subcommittee favorably report the bill, H.R. 632, to the Full Committee. The motion was agreed to by a voice vote. 

The Full Committee on Science and Technology met on Wednesday, May 23, 2007 to consider the bill. An amendment in the nature of a substitute was offered by Ranking Member Inglis. The 

amendment clarified duties of the Secretary and the administering 

entity, required a report to Congress about award recipients and 

the technologies developed, and made other clarifying, minor, and 

technical changes to the bill. The amendment was agreed to by a 

voice vote. 

The motion to adopt the bill, as amended, was agreed to by a 

voice vote. Mr. Hall moved that the Full Committee favorably report the bill, H.R. 632, as amended, to the House with the recommendation that the bill, as amended, do pass, and that the staff 

be instructed to prepare the legislative report and make necessary 

technical and conforming changes, and that the Chairman take all 

necessary steps to bring the bill before the House for consideration. 

The motion was agreed to by a voice vote. 

VI. SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS OF THE BILL, AS REPORTED

Creates a prize program at DOE for advances in hydrogen technologies to be administered through a private, non-profit entity 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

9 

(‘‘the administering entity’’). DOE is to award three types of prizes 

(described below). 

Establishes prizes of not more than $1 million to be awarded 

every other year to the best technology advancements in components or systems related to each of hydrogen production, hydrogen 

storage, hydrogen distribution, and hydrogen utilization. 

Establishes a prize of not more than $4 million to be awarded for 

prototypes of hydrogen-powered vehicles or hydrogen-based products that best meet or exceed objective performance criteria. 

Awards for the prototype prize are to be given in alternate years 

from the technology advancement prizes. 

Establishes a prize of at least $10 million to be awarded for 

transformational changes in technologies for the production and 

distribution of hydrogen that meet or exceed far-reaching objective 

criteria. Limits the federal contribution to $10,000,000, and sets a 

private fundraising goal of $40,000,000. Prize money over 

$10,000,000 may be provided as matching funds for every dollar of 

private funding raised by the winner for the continued development 

and commercialization of their winning technology. 

Enumerates duties of the ‘‘administering entity.’’ These include 

broad advertising of the prizes and their results, fundraising for 

administrative costs and cash prizes (which may include the sale 

of naming rights to the prizes), working with the Secretary to develop prize criteria based on goals provided by the Secretary; working with the Secretary to determine the appropriate prize amounts 

to be awarded under the transformational changes prize category; 

and selecting judges using criteria developed in consultation with 

the Secretary. Prize criteria, Federal funding, and judge selection 

are subject to final approval by the Secretary. 

Requires a report to Congress identifying award recipients, the 

technologies developed by each award recipient, and actions being 

taken toward commercial application of these technologies. 

Authorizes $20 million for advancements in components, $20 million for advancements in prototypes, and $10 million for transformational changes for the period encompassing fiscal years 2008 

through 2017, with funds expiring 10 fiscal years after the fiscal 

year in which they were appropriated. Also authorizes $2 million 

for administrative costs for each of fiscal years 2008 and 2009. 

VII. SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title 

The H-Prize Act of 2007 

Sec. 2. Definitions 

Defines Administering Entity, Department and Secretary. 

Sec. 3. Prize authority 

Requires the Secretary of Energy to create a prize to advance the 

research, development, demonstration and commercial application 

of hydrogen energy technologies. 

Requires the Secretary to advertise the prize competitions widely 

to encourage broad participation, including outreach to historically 

black colleges and universities, other minority serving institutions, 

as well as large and small businesses, including minority and dismstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

10 

advantaged businesses. Includes a specific direction to announce 

the prize competitions through publication of a Federal Register 

notice. 

Requires the Secretary to enter into an agreement with a private, non-profit entity to administer the prize competitions. Enumerates the duties of the administering entity to include advertising the prizes and their results, fundraising for administrative 

costs and cash prizes (which may include the sale of naming rights 

to the prizes), working with the Secretary to develop prize criteria 

based upon goals provided by the Secretary, working with the Secretary to determine the appropriate amounts for prizes awarded 

under the transformational changes category described in section 4, 

selecting judges using criteria developed in consultation with the 

Secretary, and preventing the unauthorized use or disclosure of a 

registered participant’s trade secrets and confidential business information. Clarifies that prize criteria, Federal funding, and judge 

selection are subject to final approval by the Secretary. 

Authorizes the Secretary to use funding directly appropriated for 

such purposes to the Department of Energy (DOE) or other agencies and to accept funds provided by private entities or individuals. 

Prohibits the announcement of any prize competition until sufficient funds are available. Sunsets the authority to award prizes in 

2018. 

Sec. 4. Prize categories 

Defines prize categories for: 

(i) Components or Systems. Establishes up to four $1 million 

prizes awarded every other year to the best advancements in technologies, components, or systems related to hydrogen production, 

hydrogen storage, hydrogen distribution, and hydrogen utilization. 

Provides the Secretary the discretion to reduce the amount or number of prizes based upon the availability of funds. (ii) Prototypes. Establishes one $4 million prize for prototypes of 

hydrogen-powered vehicles or hydrogen-based products that best 

meet or exceed objective performance criteria. Awards prototype 

prizes in years alternate with the technology advancements prize. 

Prohibits the Secretary from awarding the prize if no entrant 

meets the objectively defined performance criteria. 

(iii) Transformational Changes. Establishes a minimum 

$10,000,000 lump sum prize award for transformational changes in 

technologies for the production and distribution of hydrogen that 

meet or exceed far-reaching objective criteria. Limits the federal 

contribution to $10,000,000, and sets a private fundraising goal of 

$40,000,000 for prize money provided as matching funds for every 

dollar of private funding raised by the winner for the continued development of their winning technology. 

Requires the Secretary to establish contest criteria through consultation with the Hydrogen Technical Advisory Committee and 

other federal agencies including the National Science Foundation. 

States that the Secretary also may consult with private organizations including the National Academy of Sciences and National 

Academy of Engineering. Requires the Secretary, in consultation 

with the administering entity, to appoint contest judges from the 

private sector and agencies outside DOE. Excludes judges, their 

spouses, minor children, or other members of their household who 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

11 

may have a personal or financial relationship with any contest participant. 

Sec. 5. Eligibility 

Requires contestants to register through the process published in 

the Federal Register. Requires contestants be incorporated and 

maintain a primary place of business in the U.S. if a private entity, 

and must be a U.S. citizen if an individual. Excludes from participation any Federal entities or Federal or national laboratory employees while on duty. 

Sec. 6. Intellectual property 

Waives claims by the Federal government to any intellectual 

property rights derived from participation in the prize competitions. 

Sec. 7. Liability 

Requires contestants to waive claims against the Federal Government resulting from participation in prize competition activities. 

Requires contestants to have liability insurance against damages 

resulting from participation in any prize competition activity and 

to name the Federal Government as an additional insured entity. 

Sec. 8. Report to Congress 

Requires the Secretary to submit a report to Congress, no later 

than 60 days after awarding the first prize, which identifies each 

award recipient, describes the technologies developed, and specifies 

actions taken toward commercial application of the technologies for 

which a prize has been awarded. 

Sec. 9. Authorization of Appropriations 

Authorizes $20 million for advancements in components, $20 million for advancements in prototypes, and $10 million for transformational changes for the period encompassing fiscal years 2008 

through 2017, with funds expiring 10 fiscal years after the fiscal 

year in which they were appropriated. Authorizes $2 million for administrative costs for each of fiscal years 2008 and 2009. 

Sec. 10. Nonsubstitution 

Expresses a sense of the Congress that the prize competitions 

shall not act as a substitute for any research and development programs. 

VIII. COMMITTEE VIEW

Commercialization of awarding winning technologies 

While Section 6 of this Act prohibits the Department of Energy 

from requiring participants to surrender intellectual property 

rights as a condition of participating or winning an award in a 

competition, the Department has an interest in making sure that 

technologies that win awards are commercialized. Section 3(a) explains that the awards program shall advance commercial application of hydrogen energy technologies and in Section 3(b)(2) the Secretary has the duty to establish the eligibility requirements for participation in the contest including those that advance commercial 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

12 

application. These may include commercialization plans and attestations by contestants that if they win a prize they will take specific actions to assure their best efforts towards achieving the projected application of the award-winning technologies within a reasonable time. Furthermore, nothing in this Act precludes any agency of the Federal Government, which is otherwise so empowered, 

from furthering commercialization of hydrogen technologies, by negotiating for licenses for the use of intellectual property developed 

for a prize competition under this Act. 

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. 632 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. 632 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. 632—H-Prize Act of 2007 

Summary: H.R. 632 would authorize the appropriation of $54 

million over the 2008–2017 period to the Department of Energy 

(DOE) to award cash prizes to individuals, universities, and businesses that make significant advances in the field of hydrogen energy. Based on goals set forth by DOE, prizes would be awarded 

every two years for the most significant advancements in hydrogen 

production, storage, distribution, and utilization as well as the development of a prototype for a hydrogen-powered vehicle or hydrogen-based product. CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 632 

would cost $30 million over the 2008–2012 period, assuming the 

appropriation of the necessary funds. An additional $24 million 

would be spent after 2012. Enacting H.R. 632 would have no effect 

on direct spending or revenues. 

H.R. 632 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA); 

any costs to public institutions of higher education would be incurred voluntarily. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 632 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 250 (general science, 

space, and technology). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Estimated Authorization Level ................................................................................ 16 6 4 4 4 

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................................... 2 16 4 4 4 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

13 

Basis of estimate: H.R. 632 would authorize the appropriation of 

$54 million over the 2008–2017 period for the Department of Energy (DOE) to award cash prizes for achievements in the development of hydrogen energy technologies. Such amounts include $50 

million for cash prizes, and $4 million for DOE to enter into an 

agreement with a private, nonprofit entity to administer the program. For this estimate, CBO assumes that the bill will be enacted 

in fiscal year 2007 and that the amounts authorized by the bill will 

be appropriated over 10 years, beginning with fiscal year 2008. 

Under the bill, prize competitions would be held over the next 10 

years to encourage hydrogen energy research and development. Individuals, private, nonprofit organizations, and businesses would be 

eligible to compete for separate prizes of up to $1 million for demonstrating a significant advancement in hydrogen production, storage, distribution, or utilization, or up to $4 million for developing 

a prototype of a hydrogen-powered vehicle or hydrogen-based product. Competitions in these areas would be held every two years up 

until 2018, when the authority to make such awards would expire. 

A separate one-time competition would be held to award $10 million for an innovation that transforms the distribution or production of hydrogen. 

For this estimate, CBO expects that prize announcements would 

be made in the year funds are appropriated and that final awards 

would be made in the following year. We expect that $2 million in 

administrative costs would be incurred in each of fiscal years 2008 

and 2009. This estimate also assumes that the $10 million prize 

will be awarded in 2009. CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 

632 would cost $2 million in 2008 and $30 million over the 2008–

2012 period, assuming the appropriation of the necessary funds. An 

additional $24 million would be spent after 2012. 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 632 contains 

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA. Funding authorized in the bill may benefit public institutions of higher education that compete for funds in connection with 

hydrogen research. Any costs to comply with the requirements of 

the competition, including obtaining liability insurance, would be 

incurred voluntarily. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Daniel Hoople; Impact on 

State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Lisa Ramirez-Branum; Impact on the Private Sector: Amy Petz. 

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

XI. COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

H.R. 632 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. 632 

are to create a prize program at DOE that awards three types of 

prizes for advances in hydrogen technologies to be administered 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

14 

through a private, non-profit entity (‘‘the administering entity’’) 

and through the prize program to accelerate the movement within 

the United States towards the commercial availability of hydrogenbased fuel. 

XIV. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

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

grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 632. 

XV. FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

H.R. 632 does not establish nor authorize the establishment of 

any advisory committee. 

XVI. CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

The Committee finds that H.R. 632 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. 632 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

The bill does not change existing law. 

XX. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS

On May 23, 2007, the Committee on Science and Technology favorably reported H.R. 632, as amended, by a voice vote and recommended its enactment. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

(15) 

XXI. PROCEEDINGS OF THE MARKUP BY THE 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT ON H.R. 632, THE H–PRIZE ACT OF 

2007 

THURSDAY, MAY 10, 2007 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:15 a.m., in Room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Nick Lampson 

[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Chairman LAMPSON. The Subcommittee on Energy and Environment will come to order. Pursuant to notice, the Subcommittee on 

Energy and Environment needs to consider the following measures: 

H.R. 364, To provide for the establishment of the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, and H.R. 632, the H–Prize Act of 

2007. 

We will now proceed with the markup beginning with opening 

statements and I will begin. 

Today we will consider two bills that represent another step of 

the Committee’s effort to push the envelope of technological possibility and provide the American people a future with cheaper, 

cleaner and better energy options. 

For decades my district has been synonymous with oil and gas 

or energy generally. To a large extent it has been the economic 

foundation for that area, for the great State of Texas and even for 

the Nation. And the truth is that we should expect that oil, gas and 

other traditional sources of energy such as coal and nuclear will 

provide much of our nation’s energy for decades to come. 

But the winds of change are indeed blowing. And the folks in my 

district know as well as anyone the predicament that we face in 

sky-high energy prices, the environmental impacts of our energy 

use and the critical need for maintaining jobs in the energy sector. 

In this respect, the Nation faces a challenge like none we have 

encountered before. Unlike the Apollo and Manhattan Projects 

which galvanized our nation’s scientists to win a global race to put 

a man on the Moon or create a ‘‘weapon to end all wars’’ there is 

no finish line in this race. We are attempting to transform a national and to some extent global economy which is based on only 

a handful of unsustainable energy resources. Resources that we 

know will simply not last. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

16 

Despite their remarkable technological advances, we cannot expect the energy industry and the current programs at the Department of Energy to tackle these problems on their own. Only 

through ground-breaking research and the development of truly 

transformational technologies can we begin to match up to the 

scale and the complexity of these challenges. 

Now this requires from us a rock solid commitment to innovative 

energy R&D and a leap of faith that somewhere on the shelves of 

our national labs or in the garages in our nation’s inventors or in 

the halls of research universities there are discoveries and technologies waiting to be exploited by a new energy industry. 

The two bills that we are here to mark up today represent the 

kind of bold efforts that are needed in advancing energy research 

and ensuring that the United States maintains a lead in these 

emerging technology fields. Therefore, I urge their passage and 

look forward to getting them to the House Floor. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Lampson follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN NICK LAMPSON

Today we will consider two bills that represent another step in this committee’s efforts to push the envelope of technological possibility, and provide the American 

people a future with cheaper, cleaner, better energy options. 

For decades my district has been synonymous with oil and gas (or Energy, generally). To a large extent it has been the economic foundation for this area, for the 

great State of Texas, and even for the Nation. 

And the truth is that we should expect that oil, gas and other more traditional 

sources of energy, such as coal and nuclear, will provide much of our nation’s energy 

for decades to come. 

But the winds of change are blowing, and the folks in my district know as well 

as anyone the predicament we face in sky-high energy prices, the environmental impacts of our energy use, and the critical need for maintaining jobs in the energy sector. 

In this respect, the Nation faces a challenge like none we have encountered before. Unlike the Apollo and Manhattan projects, which galvanized our nation’s scientist to win a global race to put a man on the Moon, or create a ‘‘weapon to end 

all wars,’’ there is no finish line in this race. 

We are attempting to transform a national, and to some extent global, economy 

which is based on only a handful of unsustainable energy resources. Resources that 

we know will simply not last. 

Despite their remarkable technological advances, we can’t expect the energy industry, and the current programs at the Department of Energy to tackle these problems on their own. 

Only through ground-breaking research, and the development of truly transformational technologies, can we begin to match up to the scale and complexity of 

these challenges. 

This requires from us a rock-solid commitment to innovative energy R&D, and a 

leap of faith that somewhere on the shelves of our national labs, in the garages of 

our nation’s inventors, and in the halls of our research universities, there are discoveries and technologies waiting to be exploited by a new energy industry. 

The two bills that we are here to markup today represent the kind of bold efforts 

that are needed in advancing energy research, and ensuring the U.S. maintains a 

lead in these emerging technology fields. 

Therefore I urge their passage, and look forward to getting them to the House 

Floor. 

Chairman LAMPSON. I will now recognize Mr. Inglis to present 

his opening remarks. 

Mr. INGLIS. And I thank the Chairman for yielding. First of all, 

we are very happy to have you back in the Chair, Mr. Lampson. 

It is——

Chairman LAMPSON. Thank you very——

Mr. INGLIS.—great to——

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

17 

Chairman LAMPSON.—very much. 

Mr. INGLIS.—have you back. You are looking great and—— Chairman LAMPSON. Thank you. 

Mr. INGLIS.—healthy and all of that, so we are—now you had 

some capable folks filling in for you, you understand. But we 

are——

Chairman LAMPSON. I am very appreciative—— Mr. INGLIS.—but we are happy to have you back, so—— Chairman LAMPSON. Thank you very much. 

Mr. INGLIS.—and, you know, it is helpful to be here today talking 

about energy and two different bills that can help us achieve some 

of the objectives that we have got. 

Sometimes people wonder about those objectives. My wife was at 

a gathering a couple of months ago and a lady told her Bob has 

got to stop talking about energy so much. We are tired of hearing 

from him about energy. And I would note that as the price of gasoline is now above three dollars a gallon that probably Marianne 

would have a different message coming from that lady now and 

that it is good to focus a lot on energy. So it depends on what the 

price at the pump is as to whether we think it is a great thing to 

focus on. 

But the objective of these bills today is to look long-term and not 

to the gas prices that fluctuate up and down based on the month. 

I do hope that we take the message from those gas prices, that 

they are volatile. They will go up and down. But the long-term trajectory has to be up. And so therefore we are looking for energy 

sources besides those. 

And so today two bills that help us get to there—to that place 

of energy independence we hope one is, ARPA–E which is designed 

to create breakthrough technology opportunities and the other, the 

H–Prize Bill, which is even a little bit longer term proposition but 

something that can hopefully lead us to a new source of energy. So 

we are happy to be here marking up these bills, Mr. Chairman. 

And I have got the more complete opening statement that I would 

like to submit for the record. 

Chairman LAMPSON. With no—without objection. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Inglis follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE BOB INGLIS

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this markup on the establishment of the 

H–Prize and ARPA–E. The bills we discuss today represent a common goal: harnessing American innovation to meet our need for energy and improve our energy 

security. 

One hundred years ago, the space travel concept was madness. Forty years ago, 

only a select group of elite astronauts could visit the Moon. Ten years ago, just a 

handful of visionaries thought that the highway to space would soon open to all 

travelers. Today, paying customers can pre-book flights to space, and in two years, 

from their seat on a space plane, they will take digital pictures of the Earth to share 

with their friends and family back home. 

Twelve short years mark the gap between science fiction and commercial space 

flight. Imagination and innovation bridged the gap. In 1996, Peter Diamandis joined 

forces with the Ansari family of investors and created the X–Prize, offering $10 million to the first reusable sub-orbital space vehicle. Eight years later, Burt Rutan’s 

SpaceshipOne won the prize, launching into sub-orbital space flight twice in two 

weeks. Shortly after, Richard Branson teamed up with Rutan, and Virgin Galactic 

will soon convert a space-age science project into a new tourist industry. 

The energy industry in 2007 looks a lot like the space flight sector did in 1996. 

We’ve seen important incremental gains, but overall innovation has slowed. We demstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

18 

pend on volatile fossil fuels, scratch our head at how to deal with carbon emissions, 

and get more and more frustrated with each cent increase in the cost of gasoline. 

We know that there has to be a better way to do energy. 

Taking a prize approach to the energy problem allows our imagination to run with 

the prospects of coupling a pioneering vision with a hydrogen prize, or H–Prize, incentive for innovation in hydrogen energy. Our history tells us that what starts with 

an imaginative dream or vision typically finishes in a legacy of American innovation. There’s a multi-billion, if not trillion, dollar industry that we can create from 

a hydrogen energy source free of emissions, renewable, cost-effective, and Americanmade. 

Imagine an inventor in Spartanburg, SC and an entrepreneur in Greenville 

teaming up to work on the challenge of hydrogen storage. The entrepreneur secures 

a license for metal hydride storage material from the Hydrogen Research Center at 

the Savannah River National Lab. The inventor is a retiree from the Oak Ridge National Lab, with a lifetime of experience in alternative fuels. They’ve heard about 

the H–Prize, and it’s provided the spark to light the fuse of their imagination. The 

Discovery Channel has a new idea for a show on alternative fuels, and has agreed 

to follow their progress. 

They set to work improving the material to store more hydrogen at lower weight, 

and a year later they submit their work to the H–Prize judging panel for best incremental gain in storage technology. Their careful work wins the prize, and they’ve got $1 million to show for it. They use part of the money to pay their investors, but 

they convince their investors that they could win even bigger in the prototype competition. They assemble a small team and get to work. 

After a year of all-nighters and Ramen noodles, they have their prototype for a 

storage subsystem. The Discovery Channel has the beginnings of a new reality show 

(who knew scientists could be so caddy?). Their metal hydride dust could fill the 

frame of a car, safely providing the hydrogen fuel and eliminating the need for a 

fuel tank. BMW loves the idea and before their team even won the $4 million prize 

for best prototype, BMW is competing to license their technology for the next 

version of the Hydrogen 7 sedan. 

Now the team’s investors are really buzzing. They’ve partnered with automotive 

engineering departments at several universities and are hard at work designing a 

new mass-producible vehicle at Clemson University’s International Center for Automotive Research in Greenville. They’ve got their eyes on the grand prize for transformational technologies. Duke Power has become a partner to provide economical, 

carbon-free hydrogen from nuclear power. A local gasoline marketer has jumped in 

to help with distribution, offering modified fuel trucks running on biodiesel and 

pump space for hydrogen. Corporate investors from around the world are pitching 

in to get their logo—NASCARstyle—on the car, fueling station, and everything in 

between. 

The South Carolina team is only one of many around the country, but the Discovery Channel cameras testify that their hearts are in it to win. Over the course 

of five years, Team Palmetto assembles, jimmy-rigs, and invents the technologies to 

take them to the top. The judges deem them the best, and they receive the $10 million cash prize for their hard work. Of course, at this point their investors see that 

more gains lie ahead, so the team easily raises $40 million in venture capital, which 

is matched by other private money for corporate sponsorship of the H–Prize. Within 

three years, their emission-free HyFlyer cars zipping along the East and West Coast 

Hydrogen Highways, in Europe, and even Japan and China. 

It’s not so farfetched. The prize idea has worked in the past, from the Transcontinental Railroad, to Lindbergh and the Orteig Prize, to Burt Rutan and the X–

Prize. Others see the prize working in the future: the Automotive X–Prize, Rep. 

Frank Wolf’s NSF prize, Rep. Dan Lungren’s Automotive Prize. H–Prize has the advantage of focusing on a far reaching technology where breakthroughs are needed 

and harnessing the American innovative and entrepreneurial spirit to tackle those 

challenges. 

Prize money is one seed from which energy technology and industry can grow. But 

it will not be the only source for energy breakthroughs. There is still a need for research and development funding for our nation’s scientists, labs, and universities. 

The ARPA–E bill that we will markup today addresses a need to sponsor exploration in high-risk endeavors. 

ARPA–E research could offer a big payoff in the commercial energy market. At 

the same time, I already see real payoffs coming from existing DOE research, especially hydrogen, nuclear, wind, and solar programs. I’m concerned that the ARPA–

E fund will divert funds away from these existing programs and jeopardize the advances we’re already seeing in these areas. I hope that we can find a way to ensure 

this doesn’t happen. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

19 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with you on these two 

bills. 

Mr. INGLIS. Thank you. I look forward to the markup here. 

Chairman LAMPSON. Thank you very much, Ranking Member 

Inglis. 

We will now consider H.R. 632, the H–Prize Act of 2007. 

And I yield to Mr. Lipinski, five minutes, to describe this bill. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have to be here 

today for the markup of H.R. 632, the H–Prize Act of 2007, a bill 

that I introduced along with Ranking Member Inglis as one step 

in addressing global climate change and spurring national energy 

independence. 

This is the bill that we moved out of the Science Committee last 

year and we passed it on the House Floor by a vote of 416 to six. 

It wound up being stalled in the other chamber last year, as many 

things are. This year we believe that this bill can be successfully 

steered through both chambers and sent to the President. So today 

we have the first step. 

It is obvious to all of us the damage being caused by our current 

energy economy. Gas prices have skyrocketed over the last few 

weeks. They continue to hit record highs, averaging over three dollars a gallon nationwide. But back home in my district it is around 

$3.50 a gallon. But then again, when I left last week, I was gone 

for three days and it went up about 20 cents, so I am not sure 

where those prices are now. And the situation is inflicting pain on 

our constituents and our economy. 

But the cost of our addiction to oil not only affects our pocketbooks. It affects our environment and national security. We cannot 

continue to pollute our air and alter our climate with greenhouse 

gas emissions and we cannot continue to rely on energy sources 

from unstable parts of the world. We must find new solutions. And 

hydrogen has great potential to be a solution. 

Environmental promise is great. Using hydrogen as an energy 

source produces no emissions besides water. And hydrogen-fueled 

cars already exist. But the technical barriers and the economic barriers are significant. I believe the—one of the cars that I drove—

hydrogen-fueled cars cost a couple million dollars, I think they 

said, to produce. Now what we have here in the H–Prize Act, we 

are seeking to inspire researchers, entrepreneurs and the competitive spirit of others towards the surmount the barriers that we face 

right now and find specific solutions that will facilitate development and commercialization of hydrogen fuel. The H–Prize would 

help expand the possibility of hydrogen research, promoting people 

not normally involved in federal research and development, explore 

one of the greatest challenges facing us today. 

Specifically, this legislation would establish competitively awarded cash prizes to spur innovations that advance the use of hydrogen as a fuel for transportation. Every two years four one-million 

dollar prizes would be given for advances in production, storage, 

distribution, and utilization of hydrogen. And one four-million dollar prize would be awarded for advances in prototype hydrogen vehicles. And at the end of 10 years, one grand prize of 10 million 

dollars would be given for a transformational advance in hydrogen 

energy technology. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

20 

This prize will help us to take advantage of America’s greatest 

resource: our ingenuity and creativity. We have some of the best 

and brightest minds in the world in the United States as well as 

an economy that supports and encourages entrepreneurship. And 

each prize will focus this inventiveness to address the greatest 

challenge that our country faces today. 

Energy independence is essential to national security. It is reducing the price at the pump. And investing in an alternative to fossil 

fuels such as hydrogen is a strong step in the right direction. I believe that the ARPA–E program which we just passed the bill on 

is also an important part of this. There is not one solution. There 

is not one bill that we are going to pass that we know is going to 

be the silver bullet. But there is much that we must do so that we 

can move ahead and move beyond the current energy economy that 

we have. 

And hydrogen, for one, holds enormous potential as a base of a 

future economy. And this is a potential that we should not ignore. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I yield back the balance of my 

time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Lipinski follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE DANIEL LIPINSKI

Thank you, Mr. Chairman; I am pleased to be here today for the markup of H.R. 

632, the H–Prize Act of 2007, a bill I introduced—along with Ranking Member Inglis—as one step in addressing global climate change and spurring national energy 

independence. 

This is a bill that we moved out of the Science Committee last year and we passed 

on the House Floor by a vote of 416 to 6. Unfortunately the bill stalled in the other 

chamber last year. This year we believe that this bill can be successfully steered 

through both chambers and be sent to the President. Today we have the first step. 

It is obvious to all of us the damage being caused by our current energy situation. 

Gas prices have skyrocketed over the last few weeks and continue to hit record 

highs, averaging over $3 a gallon nationwide and in my district in the Chicago area 

around $3.50 per gallon. This situation is inflicting pain on our constituents and on 

our economy. But the costs of our addiction to oil not only affect our pocketbooks, 

they affect our environment and national security. We cannot continue to pollute 

our air and alter our climate with greenhouse gases emissions, and we cannot continue to rely on energy sources from unstable parts of the world. We must find new 

solutions and hydrogen has great potential to be a solution. The environmental 

promise is great. Using hydrogen as an energy source produces no emissions besides 

water. Zero polluting emissions. And hydrogen-fueled cars already exist. But the 

technical barriers and the economic barriers are significant. 

H.R. 632 seeks to inspire researchers, entrepreneurs, and others’ competitive spirits to work to surmount these barriers and find specific solutions that will facilitate 

development and commercialization of hydrogen fuel. The H–Prize will help expand 

the possibilities of hydrogen research, promoting people not normally involved in 

federal research and development to explore one of the greatest challenges facing 

us today. 

Specifically, this legislation would establish competitively awarded cash prizes to 

spur innovations that advance the use of hydrogen as a fuel for transportation. 

Every two years, four $1 million prizes would be given for advances in the production, storage, distribution, and utilization of hydrogen, and one $4 million prize 

would be awarded for advances in prototype hydrogen vehicles. And at the end of 

ten years one grand prize of $10 million would be given for a transformational advance in hydrogen energy technology. 

This prize will help us take advantage of America’s great resource—our ingenuity 

and creativity. We have some of the best and brightest minds in the world in the 

United States, as well as an economy that supports and encourages entrepreneurship, and the H–Prize will focus this inventiveness to address the greatest challenge 

that our country faces today. 

Energy independence is essential to national security and to reducing the price 

at the pump and investing in an alternative to fossil fuels such as hydrogen is a 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

21 

strong step in the right direction. Hydrogen holds enormous potential as the base 

of our future economy—a potential we cannot and must not ignore. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I encourage all of my colleagues to support the 

H–Prize Act. 

Chairman LAMPSON. Thank you very much. And I recognize Mr. 

Inglis for any remarks on this bill. 

Mr. INGLIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would simply say this. 

We were able to get 416 votes for this bill in the last Congress. 416 

to 6. And so hopefully we can do something like that again this 

Congress and it can pass the House and then get some action over 

in the Senate. I will anticipate some objections to it, that hydrogen 

is a ways away, perhaps. But as I think is clear, we did not get 

to the moon by waiting for it to come close. So we will not get to 

a hydrogen economy waiting for it to just sort of happen. We have 

to figure out ways to work toward it and employ the creative capacity of inventors and entrepreneurs out there similar to what we 

saw done in the X–Prize. 

And of course, the X–Prize is the foundation of the concept here. 

That is what—we borrowed heavily from them. And the last Congress had a very helpful hearing with Dr. Diamandis, of the X–

Prize Foundation, who told us that what you have got to do is basically make sure that this does not become a middling U.S. Department of Energy kind of program. It must be a separate kind of 

prize that creates lift—media lift and attention and the opportunity 

to win a prize because the reality is we all work real hard to win 

prizes. 

United Way holds out, you know, a T-shirt and whoever can 

raise a certain amount gets this T-shirt—well, you could go buy the 

T-shirt for less than the money that you are going to spend trying 

to raise the money but you do it anyway because you want to win 

the prize. And that is what Diamandis told us. There is a real desire to win prizes and there is money and creative capacity that we 

unleashed out there, around the world really, in order to try to win 

the X–Prize. And hopefully we can do that with the H–Prize. So I 

am happy to be supportive of the bill. And I yield back. 

Chairman LAMPSON. Thank you very much. Who else seeks——

Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman LAMPSON. Yes, Mr. Bartlett. 

Mr. BARTLETT. I——

Chairman LAMPSON. You are recognized for five minutes. 

Mr. BARTLETT. Thank you. I strongly support this bill. Not because I think that hydrogen is going to play any big role in our energy future. Hydrogen, of course, is not an energy source. We have 

to make hydrogen from some other energy source and hydrogen 

will always contain less energy than the source that we made it 

from. It is either natural gas or electricity. And there may be other 

sources but those are two today. 

The attractiveness of hydrogen is that it does not pollute when 

you burn it. You just get water. After all, water is the oxide of hydrogen. But depending on how you made the hydrogen you may 

have polluted as much as you would pollute driving a gasoline car. 

So we have to be careful. But then it is all in one big place and 

you can control it better. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

22 

The real attractiveness of hydrogen is it is a great candidate for 

a fuel cell if we ever get a fuel cell. But we are probably 20 years 

away from a fuel cell. Just burning hydrogen in a reciprocating engine does not make much sense. Because if you start out with electricity electroizing water you could have used the electricity to fill 

a battery and you could drive your car on the battery. As a matter 

of fact, in one of our Science Committee hearings three experts 

were there. And of the three ways that you might transport hydrogen—these are the lightest element in the universe that we know 

of. These molecules do not like their own company. They try to get 

as far apart as possible. So you have to really press real hard on 

them to get them close together. So if it is pressurized, it is really 

high pressure vessel to carry much hydrogen at all. The hydrogen 

airplane, by the way, would have the plane full of hydrogen and 

a couple of passengers hanging on the wings because the energy 

density is so low. But it is a great candidate for a fuel cell when 

we get a fuel cell. 

But the reason I am so strongly in support of this, I think this 

is a fantastic idea to give this award. And you know, the Romans 

would practice for how long to run in those races. And look at our 

people that go to the Olympics. I mean, it is a life goal. And what 

do they get from it? A silly little ribbon and a gold or silver or 

brass thing hanging around their neck. But look how they work for 

that. And I think the leverage of this is just incredible. 

If I added up the numbers right we are committing, what, $28 

million to this or $18 million. $18 million. Four, four, four, four, 

four, and 10, right? 18 million dollars. I cannot imagine any better 

way to spend 18 million dollars. And I hope this is just the beginning of a lot of bills for prizes. There are a whole lot of things that 

we could give prizes for. And you pointed out very correctly, Mr. 

Inglis, that people work a heck of a lot harder for a prize than they 

will for their paycheck. So I think this is a great idea. And—not 

because I think hydrogen is going to be playing any meaningful 

role in our energy future. If we get fuel cells it will play a meaningful role in transportation. 

Oh, the three ways you can transport it. Push the molecules close 

together. Liquefy it. But then you have to have a big insulation 

that boils off at night. And the third way, which they said was 

going to be the way that if we ever had a hydrogen economy would 

work. And that is in solid state as a battery. And I see Counsel 

shaking his head in agreement. This is what they said. And I asked 

them is a hydrogen battery inherently more efficient than an electron battery and they did not know the answer. But I am still a 

big fan of this legislation because I think this is the kind of thing 

we need to be doing over and over again. Not just paying people 

to do something but challenge them to do something. This award 

will mean a whole lot more to them than a big paycheck would 

mean. So it is a great bill. Thank you very much. 

Chairman LAMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Bartlett. Who else seeks 

recognition? I have enjoyed the comments that everyone has made. 

And obviously it is critically important for us to be doing these 

kinds of things. Texas even was involved a little bit, trying to take 

a stand on—in a belief that a major facet of energy independence 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

23 

lies largely in hydrogen production. Hopefully we can find ways to 

do that. 

We recently had the National Hydrogen Convention in Texas and 

it was followed by a coalition sponsored by Ride and Drive of hydrogen powered vehicles. A lot of people doing different work. And 

the Canadians I think are more advanced with what they have 

been doing with—in comparison to the United States. I believe 

firmly that when we invest in these kinds of programs we get huge 

returns back. 

Who else seeks recognition? Anyone? 

Mr. LIPINSKI. I just want to quickly say I think I thank Dr. Bartlett for his support. I was not sure with all that he said and I 

have—I am certainly not going to argue with the good doctor here 

on—about the prospects for hydrogen. But I am a little more hopeful, maybe, but I thank you. 

Chairman LAMPSON. Anyone else seek recognition? 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, it is so 

ordered. 

Are there any amendments? Hearing none, the vote is on the bill, 

H.R. 632, the H–Prize Act of 2007. All those in favor say aye. All 

those opposed will say no. 

In the opinion of the Chair the ayes have it. I recognize Mr. Inglis to offer a motion. 

Mr. INGLIS. Chairman, I move that the Subcommittee favorably 

report H.R. 632 as amended to the Full Committee. Furthermore, 

I move that the staff be instructed to prepare the Subcommittee 

legislative report and make necessary technical and conforming 

changes to the bill in accordance with the recommendations of the 

Subcommittee. And actually, there is no amendment to the bill so 

we are happy to have it as it was and present it. 

Chairman LAMPSON. Very good. I thank the Ranking Member. 

The question is on the motion to report the bill favorably. Those 

in favor of the motion will signify by saying aye. Those opposed no. 

The ayes have it. The bill is favorably reported. Without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. Subcommittee 

Members may submit additional and minority views on the measure. I would like to thank the Members for their attendance, everyone who stayed all the way through this thing. And this concludes 

our Subcommittee markup. We are adjourned. Thank you. 

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

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

(25) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 632, SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

26 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632a.eps
27 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632b.eps
28 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632c.eps
29 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632d.eps
30 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632e.eps
31 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632f.eps
32 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632g.eps
33 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632h.eps
34 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632i.eps
35 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632j.eps
36 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632k.eps
37 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632l.eps
38 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF H.R. 632, 

THE H–PRIZE ACT OF 2007 

Section 1. Short Title. 

The H–Prize Act of 2007 

Sec. 2. Definitions 

Defines Administering Entity, Department and Secretary. 

Sec. 3. Prize Authority. 

Requires the Secretary of Energy to create a prize to advance the research, development, demonstration and commercial application of hydrogen energy technologies. 

Requires the Secretary to advertise the prize competitions widely to encourage 

broad participation, including outreach to historically black colleges and universities, other minority serving institutions, as well as large and small businesses, including minority and disadvantaged businesses. Includes a specific direction to announce the prize competitions through publication of a Federal Register notice. 

Requires the Secretary to enter into an agreement with a private, non-profit entity to administer the prize competitions. Enumerates the duties of the administering 

entity to include advertising the prizes and their results, fund-raising for administrative costs and cash prizes, working with the Secretary to develop prize criteria 

based upon goals provided by the Secretary, working with the Secretary to determine the appropriate amounts for prizes awarded under the transformational 

changes category described in section 4, selecting judges using criteria developed in 

consultation with the Secretary, and preventing the unauthorized use or disclosure 

of a registered participant’s intellectual property, trade secrets, and confidential 

business information. 

Authorizes the Secretary to use funding directly appropriated for such purposes 

to the Department of Energy (DOE) or other agencies and to accept funds provided 

by private entities or individuals. Prohibits the announcement of any prize competition until sufficient funds are available. Sunsets the authority to award prizes in 

2018. 

Sec. 4. Prize Categories. 

Defines prize categories for: 

(i) Components or Systems. Establishes up to four $1 million prizes 

awarded every other year to the best technology advancements in components 

or systems related to hydrogen production, hydrogen storage, hydrogen distribution, and hydrogen utilization. Provides the Secretary the discretion to reduce 

the amount or number of prizes based upon the availability of funds. 

(ii) Prototypes. Establishes one $4 million prize for prototypes of hydrogenpowered vehicles or hydrogen-based products that best meet or exceed objective 

performance criteria. Awards prototype prizes in years alternate with the technology advancements prize. Prohibits the Secretary from awarding the prize if 

no entrant meets the objectively defined performance criteria. 

(iii) Transformational Changes. Establishes a minimum $10,000,000 lump 

sum prize award for transformational changes in technologies for the production 

and distribution of hydrogen that meet or exceed far-reaching objective criteria. 

Limits the federal contribution to $10,000,000, and sets a private fund-raising 

goal of $40,000,000 for prize money provided as matching funds for every dollar 

of private funding raised by the winner for the continued development of their 

winning technology. 

Requires the Secretary to establish contest criteria through consultation with the 

Hydrogen Technical Advisory Committee, other federal agencies including the National Science Foundation, and private organizations including the National Academy of Sciences. Requires the Secretary to appoint contest judges from the private 

sector and agencies outside DOE. Excludes judges who may have a personal or financial relationship with any contest participant. 

Sec. 5. Eligibility. 

Requires contestants to register through the process published in the Federal Register. Requires contestants be incorporated and maintain a primary place of business 

in the U.S. if a private entity, and must be a U.S. citizen if an individual. Excludes 

from participation any federal entities or Federal or national laboratory employees 

while on duty. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

39 

Sec. 6. Intellectual Property. 

Waives claims by the Federal Government to any intellectual property rights derived from participation in the prize competitions. 

Sec. 7. Liability. 

Requires contestants to waive claims against the Federal Government resulting 

from participation in prize competition activities. Requires contestants to have liability insurance against damages resulting from participation in any prize competition activity and to name the Federal Government as an additional insured entity. 

Sec. 8. Authorization of Appropriations. 

Authorizes $20 million for advancements in components, $20 million for advancements in prototypes, and $10 million for transformational changes for the period encompassing fiscal years 2008 through 2017, with funds expiring 10 fiscal years after 

the fiscal year in which they were appropriated. Authorizes $2 million for administrative costs for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2017. 

Sec. 9. Non-substitution. 

Expresses a sense of the Congress that the prize competitions shall not act as a 

substitute for any research and development programs. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

(41) 

XXII. PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE MARKUP ON H.R. 632, THE H–PRIZE 

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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

42 

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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

43 

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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

44 

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 commstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

45 

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 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

46 

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. 632, the H–Prize 

Act of 2007. 

I yield to the Vice Chairman of the Committee, Mr. Lipinski five 

minutes to describe his bill. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. I thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have been here 

quite awhile. I will move quickly through this. 

This is a bill that is one more step in addressing global climate 

change in spurring national energy independence. It is a bill I have 

worked on closely with Mr. Inglis. Many people are familiar with 

this bill last year. We passed to the Science Committee, passed on 

the Floor of the House by a vote of 416 to six. Unfortunately, it 

stalled in the Senate last year. This year we have made some 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

47 

minor changes. Mr. Inglis is going to offer an amendment in a few 

minutes, and I think that these changes are going to help us to 

successfully get this bill through the Senate and signed by the 

President. 

It is obvious now that with gasoline prices that are so high, everyone is asking us what are we going to do about this. It is not 

only the high cost of gasoline hitting in the pocketbooks, but the 

cost of our addiction to oil also affects our environment and National security. 

We need to find a solution, and ARPA–E, I believe is on big way 

towards a solution, but here is another way of looking at one particular possible solution in hydrogen. Hydrogen, when it is used as 

an energy source, produces no emissions besides water, and hydrogen-fueled cars already exist, but they are very expensive. We need 

to make some breakthroughs in order to be able to put a hydrogen 

car in every American’s driveway. 

This legislation would establish prizes, specifically every two 

years, four $1 million prizes will be given for advances in production, storage, distribution, and utilization of hydrogen. One $4 million prize will be awarded for advances in prototype hydrogen vehicles. At the end of 10 years a grand prize of $10 million will be 

given for transformational advance in hydrogen energy technology. 

The purpose of this is to go about it with the H–Prize is to really 

take advantage of America’s greatest resource, her ingenuity and 

creativity. No one is being told exactly what to do. They are just 

being given the goal. They work on figuring out how to get there. 

It is just like the X prize did. 

We have some of the best and brightest minds in the U.S., as 

well as an economy that supports and encourages entrepreneurship. Each prize will help focus this inventiveness to address the 

greatest challenge that our country faces today; our addiction to oil 

and other fossil fuels. And we have to address global climate 

change and energy independence is essential to our national security and also to reducing the prices that we pay at the gas pump 

today. Investing in an alternative to fossil fuels such as hydrogen 

is a strong step in the right direction, holds tremendous potential. 

And I encourage all my colleagues to support the H–Prize Act. 

I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Lipinski follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE DANIEL LIPINSKI

Thank you, Mr. Chairman; I am pleased to be here today for the markup of H.R. 

632, the H–Prize Act of 2007, a bill I introduced—along with Ranking Member Inglis—as one step in addressing global climate change and spurring national energy 

independence. 

This is a bill that we moved out of the Science Committee last year and we passed 

on the House Floor by a vote of 416 to six. Unfortunately the bill stalled in the other 

chamber last year. 

This year, Mr. Inglis and I will be making some technical changes to the bill in 

the form of an amendment. We believe these changes will improve both the bill and 

its chances of passage in both chambers, with a final signature by the President. 

The Energy and Environment Subcommittee unanimously approved the bill earlier 

this month and we look forward to its swift passage in Full Committee today. 

It is obvious to all of us the damage being caused by our current energy situation. 

Gas prices have skyrocketed over the last few weeks and continue to hit record 

highs, averaging over $3 a gallon nationwide and in my district in the Chicago area 

around $3.50 per gallon. This situation is inflicting pain on our constituents and on 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

48 

our economy. But the costs of our addiction to oil not only affect our pocketbooks, 

they affect our environment and national security. We cannot continue to pollute 

our air and alter our climate with greenhouse gas emissions, and we cannot continue to rely on energy sources from unstable parts of the world. We must find new 

solutions and hydrogen has great potential to be a solution. The environmental 

promise is great. Using hydrogen as an energy source produces no emissions besides 

water. Zero polluting emissions. And hydrogen-fueled cars already exist. But the 

technical barriers and the economic barriers are significant. 

H.R. 632 seeks to inspire researchers, entrepreneurs, and others’ competitive spirits to work to surmount these barriers and find specific solutions that will facilitate 

development and commercialization of hydrogen fuel. The H–Prize will help expand 

the possibilities of hydrogen research, promoting people not normally involved in 

federal research and development to explore one of the greatest challenges facing 

us today. 

Specifically, this legislation would establish competitively awarded cash prizes to 

spur innovations that advance the use of hydrogen as a fuel for transportation. 

Every two years, four $1 million prizes would be given for advances in the production, storage, distribution, and utilization of hydrogen, and one $4 million prize 

would be awarded for advances in prototype hydrogen vehicles. And at the end of 

ten years one grand prize of $10 million would be given for a transformational advance in hydrogen energy technology. 

This prize will help us take advantage of America’s great resource—our ingenuity 

and creativity. The United States has some of the best and brightest minds in the 

world, as well as an economy that supports and encourages entrepreneurship, and 

the H–Prize will focus this inventiveness to address the greatest challenge that our 

country faces today. 

Energy independence is essential to national security and to reducing the price 

at the pump and investing in an alternative to fossil fuels such as hydrogen is a 

strong step in the right direction. Hydrogen holds enormous potential as the base 

of our future economy—a potential we cannot and must not ignore. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I encourage all of my colleagues to support the 

H–Prize Act. I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman GORDON. Mr. Hall is recognized. 

Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield to Mr. Inglis my time. 

Mr. INGLIS. I thank the gentleman for yielding. The bill comes 

well recommended at a 416 to six vote the last time through the 

House, so hopefully we can pass it through the House again and 

get it all the way to the Senate. 

The concept is patterned after the Ansari X Prize, which improvised space flight, entrepreneurial space flight. So this H–Prize is 

designed to do for hydrogen what the X Prize did for space flight, 

and that is to create an opportunity for entrepreneurs and inventors to come together and form teams that could help us break 

through to a hydrogen future. 

There are a number of technological challenges we face, and this 

is a non-bureaucratic, non-Governmental way of breaking through 

some of those barriers. 

So I am happy to be supporting it and urging its adoption here 

in the Committee. 

Chairman GORDON. 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 the gentleman from South 

Carolina’s amendment offered in the nature of a substitute. I ask 

unanimous consent that the amendment in the nature of a substitute be treated as original text for purposes of amendment under 

the five minute rule. Without objection, so ordered. 

Are you ready to proceed with your amendment? 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

49 

Mr. INGLIS. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman GORDON. The Clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 632 

offered by Mr. Inglis of South Carolina. 

Chairman GORDON. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 

the reading. Without objection, so ordered. 

I recognize Mr. Inglis for five or less minutes to explain the substitute amendment. 

Mr. INGLIS. Hopefully less, Mr. Chairman. 

This amendment incorporates several technical corrections as 

well as some suggestions from the Department of Energy general 

counsel and from Mr. Lipinski’s office. Essentially the changes are 

these. 

Removes provision that required all future hydrogen prizes to be 

modeled after the H–Prize, clarifies the Secretary of Energy has 

the final say over prize criteria, federal funding, and judge selection, clarifies that the administering entity can sell naming rights 

to the prizes, changes the term, ‘intellectual property’ to ‘trade secrets’ or ‘confidential business information’ to protect the Department of Energy from claims about violating patents and trademarks, allows the Secretary of Energy to withhold such proprietary 

information from public disclosure. It also provides accountability 

by requiring an annual report to Congress identifying each award 

recipient and their developed technologies. 

So these are, I think that Mr. Lipinski may want to add some 

description here. 

Chairman GORDON. Is there further discussion on the amendment? 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Chairman. 

Chairman GORDON. Mr. Lipinski is recognized. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. For this amendment, it contains some improvements to the bill. Special importance are it helps to insure accountability and promote commercialization of the prize, requires the 

Department of Energy to submit an annual report to Congress that 

identifies each award recipient and their technology, and also encourages commercialization by specifying the actions being taken 

by the recipients towards commercialization. 

So I fully support this amendment. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Lipinski follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE DANIEL LIPINSKI

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment contains a few improvements to the 

underlying bill, and is offered both by Mr. Inglis and myself. Of special importance 

to me is that this amendment helps to ensure accountability and promote commercialization of the prize-winning new technologies, both of which are important for 

the goals of this bill. 

First, our amendment provides accountability by requiring the Department of Energy to submit an annual report to Congress that identifies each award recipient 

and their prize-winning technologies. 

Second, the amendment encourages commercialization of the new technologies by 

requiring the DOE, also in their report to Congress, to specify actions being taken 

by the recipients toward commercialization. 

This amendment was developed in cooperation with Committee staff, and I thank 

them for their help. I believe these changes improve the H–Prize Act, and I encourage my colleagues to support this amendment. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

50 

Chairman GORDON. Are there other amendments to the amendment in the nature of a substitute? If not, the vote occurs on the 

amendment in the nature of a substitute. All in favor say aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

Now, is there any other amendment? Hearing none, the vote is 

on H.R. 632 as amended. All those in favor 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. 632 as amended to the House with the recommendation 

that the bill do pass. Furthermore, I move that 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, and 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 or minority views, and I move pursuant to 

Clause 1 of Rule 22 of the Rules 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. 632, the 

H–Prize Act of 2007, as amended. 

Without objection, so ordered. 

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

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

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

(51) 

Appendix: 

SUBCOMMITTEE MARKUP REPORT, H.R. 632, AMENDMENT ROSTER

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

52 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT 

REPORT FROM SUBCOMMITTEE MARKUP 

MAY 10, 2007 

H.R. 632, H–Prize Act of 2007 

I. Purpose 

The purpose of the bill is to authorize the Secretary of Energy to establish monetary prizes for achievements in overcoming scientific and technical barriers associated with hydrogen energy. 

II. Background and Need for Legislation 

Hydrogen gas is considered by many experts to be a promising fuel, particularly 

in the transportation sector. When used as a fuel, its only combustion byproduct is 

water vapor. The widespread adoption of hydrogen as a transportation fuel has the 

potential to reduce or eliminate air pollution generated by cars and trucks. 

However, unlike coal or oil, the hydrogen gas used as a fuel is not a naturally 

occurring energy resource. Hydrogen must be produced from hydrogen-bearing compounds, like water or natural gas, and that requires energy—and, unlike gasoline 

or biofuels, more energy is always required to produce it than is recovered when 

hydrogen is burned in a fuel cell. Hydrogen has the potential to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil, but the degree to which hydrogen will displace foreign 

energy supplies depends on what energy source is used to generate hydrogen gas 

in the first place. 

If hydrogen can be produced economically from energy sources that do not release 

carbon dioxide into the atmosphere—from renewable sources such as wind power or 

solar power, from nuclear power, or possibly from coal with carbon sequestration, 

then the widespread use of hydrogen as a fuel could make a major contribution to 

reducing the emission of greenhouse gases. 

While the promise of hydrogen is great, so are the technical challenges. Experts 

suggest that major advances will be required across a wide range of technologies 

for hydrogen to be affordable, safe, cleanly produced, and readily distributed. The 

production, storage, and use of hydrogen all present significant technical challenges. 

While Department of Energy (DOE) research programs have produced promising advances, much work must still be done to meet the goal of developing economically 

viable hydrogen technologies. 

Prizes are one tool the Federal Government can employ to stimulate efforts to 

overcome such technical hurdles. A 1999 National Academy of Engineering (NAE) 

panel examining the use of prizes by federal agencies suggested the following design 

principles for prize programs: 

1. Treatment of intellectual property resulting from prize contests should be 

properly aligned with the objectives and incentive structure of the prize contest. 

2. Contest rules should be seen as transparent, simple, fair, and unbiased. 

3. Prizes should be commensurate with the effort required and goals sought. 

The Act establishes three types of prizes that are in keeping with the principles 

laid out by the NAE: 

1. Biennial prizes for advancements in each of hydrogen storage, hydrogen production, hydrogen use and hydrogen distribution; 

2. A goal-oriented, biennial contest for prototypes that meet objective contest 

criteria established in advance; and 

3. A prize of at least $10 million for a goal-oriented contest for the best invention that leads to transformational changes in the distribution or production of 

hydrogen. Winners of this prize could also receive matching funds for every dollar of private funding raised by the winner for commercialization of their winning technology. 

III. Subcommittee Actions 

On January 23, 2007, Science and Technology Committee Vice Chairman Daniel 

Lipinski, for himself and Energy and Environment Subcommittee Ranking Member 

Robert Inglis, Research and Science Education Subcommittee Ranking Member 

Vernon Ehlers, Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, Rep. Michael McCaul, Rep. David 

Reichert and 20 other co-sponsors introduced H.R. 632, the H–Prize Act of 2007. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

53 

The Energy and Environment Subcommittee met on Thursday, May 10, 2007, to 

consider the bill. Mr. Inglis moved that the Subcommittee favorably report the bill, 

H.R. 632, to the Full Committee. The motion was agreed to by a voice vote. 

IV. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill 

Creates a prize program at DOE for advances in hydrogen technologies to be administered through a private, non-profit entity (‘the administering entity’). DOE is 

to award three types of prizes (described below). Establishes prizes of not more than $1 million to be awarded every other year to 

the best technology advancements in components or systems related to each of hydrogen production, hydrogen storage, hydrogen distribution, and hydrogen utilization. 

Establishes a prize of not more than $4 million to be awarded for prototypes of 

hydrogen-powered vehicles or hydrogen-based products that best meet or exceed objective performance criteria. Awards for the prototype prize are to be given in alternate years from the technology advancement prizes. Establishes a prize of at least $10 million to be awarded for transformational 

changes in technologies for the production and distribution of hydrogen that meet 

or exceed far-reaching objective criteria. Limits the federal contribution to 

$10,000,000, and sets a private fundraising goal of $40,000,000. Prize money over 

$10,000,000 may be provided as matching funds for every dollar of private funding 

raised by the winner for the continued development and commercialization of their 

winning technology. 

Enumerates duties of the ‘administering entity.’ These include broad advertising 

of the prizes and their results, fundraising for administrative costs and cash prizes, 

working with the Secretary to develop prize criteria based on goals provided by the 

Secretary; working with the Secretary to determine the appropriate prize amounts 

to be awarded under the transformational changes prize category; and selecting 

judges using criteria developed in consultation with the Secretary. 

Authorizes $11,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2007 through 2016, of which not 

more than $2,000,000 each year may be spent on administrative costs. 

V. Section by Section Analysis of the Bill, as reported by the Subcommittee 

Section 1. Short Title. 

The H–Prize Act of 2007 

Sec. 2. Definitions 

Defines Administering Entity, Department and Secretary. 

Sec. 3. Prize Authority. 

Requires the Secretary of Energy to create a prize to advance the research, development, demonstration and commercial application of hydrogen energy technologies. 

Requires the Secretary to advertise the prize competitions widely to encourage 

broad participation, including outreach to historically black colleges and universities, other minority serving institutions, as well as large and small businesses, including minority and disadvantaged businesses. Includes a specific direction to announce the prize competitions through publication of a Federal Register notice. 

Requires the Secretary to enter into an agreement with a private, non-profit entity to administer the prize competitions. Enumerates the duties of the administering 

entity to include advertising the prizes and their results, fundraising for administrative costs and cash prizes, working with the Secretary to develop prize criteria based 

upon goals provided by the Secretary, working with the Secretary to determine the 

appropriate amounts for prizes awarded under the transformational changes category described in section 4, selecting judges using criteria developed in consultation 

with the Secretary, and preventing the unauthorized use or disclosure of a registered participant’s intellectual property, trade secrets, and confidential business 

information. 

Authorizes the Secretary to use funding directly appropriated for such purposes 

to the Department of Energy (DOE) or other agencies and to accept funds provided 

by private entities or individuals. Prohibits the announcement of any prize competition until sufficient funds are available. Sunsets the authority to award prizes in 

2018. 

Sec. 4. Prize Categories. 

Defines prize categories for: 

(i) Components or Systems. Establishes up to four $1 million prizes 

awarded every other year to the best technology advancements in components 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

54 

or systems related to hydrogen production, hydrogen storage, hydrogen distribution, and hydrogen utilization. Provides the Secretary the discretion to reduce 

the amount or number of prizes based upon the availability of funds. 

(ii) Prototypes. Establishes one $4 million prize for prototypes of hydrogenpowered vehicles or hydrogen-based products that best meet or exceed objective 

performance criteria. Awards prototype prizes in years alternate with the technology advancements prize. Prohibits the Secretary from awarding the prize if 

no entrant meets the objectively defined performance criteria. 

(iii) Transformational Changes. Establishes a minimum $10,000,000 lump 

sum prize award for transformational changes in technologies for the production 

and distribution of hydrogen that meet or exceed far-reaching objective criteria. 

Limits the federal contribution to $10,000,000, and sets a private fundraising 

goal of $40,000,000 for prize money provided as matching funds for every dollar 

of private funding raised by the winner for the continued development of their 

winning technology. 

Requires the Secretary to establish contest criteria through consultation with the 

Hydrogen Technical Advisory Committee, other federal agencies including the National Science Foundation, and private organizations including the National Academy of Sciences. Requires the Secretary to appoint contest judges from the private 

sector and agencies outside DOE. Excludes judges who may have a personal or financial relationship with any contest participant. 

Sec. 5. Eligibility. 

Requires contestants to register through the process published in the Federal Register. Requires contestants be incorporated and maintain a primary place of business in the U.S. if a private entity, and must be a U.S. citizen if an individual. Excludes from participation any federal entities or federal or national laboratory employees while on duty. 

Sec. 6. Intellectual Property. 

Waives claims by the Federal Government to any intellectual property rights derived from participation in the prize competitions. 

Sec. 7. Liability. 

Requires contestants to waive claims against the Federal Government resulting 

from participation in prize competition activities. Requires contestants to have liability insurance against damages resulting from participation in any prize competition activity and to name the Federal Government as an additional insured entity. 

Sec. 8. Authorization of Appropriations. 

Authorizes $20 million for advancements in components, $20 million for advancements in prototypes, and $10 million for transformational changes for the period encompassing fiscal years 2008 through 2017, with funds expiring 10 fiscal years after 

the fiscal year in which they were appropriated. Authorizes $2 million for administrative costs for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2017. 

Sec. 9. Nonsubstitution. 

Expresses a sense of the Congress that the prize competitions shall not act as a 

substitute for any research and development programs. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARING

55 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632a.eps
56 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632b.eps
57 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632c.eps
58 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632d.eps
59 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632e.eps
60 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632f.eps
61 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632g.eps
62 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632h.eps
63 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632i.eps
64 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632j.eps
65 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632k.eps
66 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632l.eps
67 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632m.eps
68 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632n.eps
69 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632o.eps
70 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632p.eps
71 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632q.eps
72 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632r.eps
73 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632s.eps
74 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632t.eps
75 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632u.eps
76 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632v.eps
77 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632w.eps
78 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632x.eps
79 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632y.eps
80 


mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with HEARINGhr632z.eps