COMMITTEE MARKUPS OF H.R. 1224, 

H.R. 1430, H.R. 1431, H.R. 2105, H.R. 2809, 

H.R. 2763, H.R. 1159, H.R. 4376, H.R. 4377, 

H.R. 4378, H.R. 4375, H.R. 4323, H.R. 4254, 

H.R. 3397, H.R. 4675, H.R. 5345, H.R. 5346, 

H.R. 5086, H.R. 5509, H.R. 5503, H.R. 5905, 

H.R. 5907, H.R. 5906, H.R. 6227, H.R. 6229, 

H.R. 6226, H.R. 6398, S. 141, AND H.R. 6468 

COMPILATION OF MARKUPS 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND 

TECHNOLOGY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST AND SECOND SESSIONS 

2017–2018 

Serial No. CP: 115–1 

Volume 1 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

( 
COMPILATION OF MARKUPS, VOLUME 1 
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

35–710PDF WASHINGTON : 2019

COMMITTEE MARKUPS OF H.R. 1224, 

H.R. 1430, H.R. 1431, H.R. 2105, H.R. 2809, 

H.R. 2763, H.R. 1159, H.R. 4376, H.R. 4377, 

H.R. 4378, H.R. 4375, H.R. 4323, H.R. 4254, 

H.R. 3397, H.R. 4675, H.R. 5345, H.R. 5346, 

H.R. 5086, H.R. 5509, H.R. 5503, H.R. 5905, 

H.R. 5907, H.R. 5906, H.R. 6227, H.R. 6229, 

H.R. 6226, H.R. 6398, S. 141, AND H.R. 6468 

COMPILATION OF MARKUPS 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND 

TECHNOLOGY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST AND SECOND SESSIONS 

2017–2018 

Serial No. CP: 115–1 

Volume 1 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov 
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

HON. LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas, Chair 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

RANDY K. WEBER, Texas 

STEPHEN KNIGHT, California 

BRIAN BABIN, Texas 

BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia 

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia 

RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana 

GARY PALMER, Alabama 

DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida 

ANDY BIGGS, Arizona 

ROGER W. MARSHALL, Kansas 

NEAL P. DUNN, Florida 

CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana 

RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina 

DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

AMI BERA, California 

ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut 

MARC A. VEASEY, Texas 

DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia 

JACKY ROSEN, Nevada 

CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

BILL FOSTER, Illinois 

MARK TAKANO, California 

COLLEEN HANABUSA, Hawaii 

CHARLIE CRIST, Florida 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY

HON. HON. RANDY K. WEBER, Texas, Chair 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

STEPHEN KNIGHT, California 

GARY PALMER, Alabama 

DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida 

NEAL P. DUNN, Florida 

RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina 

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas 

MARC A. VEASEY, Texas 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

JACKY ROSEN, Nevada 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

BILL FOSTER, Illinois 

MARK TAKANO, California 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT

HON. JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma, Chair 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

RANDY WEBER, Texas 

JOHN MOOLENAAR, Michigan 

BRIAN BABIN, Texas 

BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas 

GARY PALMER, Alabama 

RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana 

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

AMI BERA, California 

MARK TAKANO, California 

BILL FOSTER, Illinois 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

(II) 
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT

HON. RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana, Chair 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia 

ROGER W. MARSHALL, Kansas 

CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana 

RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina 

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas 

DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

HON. BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia, Chair 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

STEPHEN KNIGHT, California 

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia 

DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida 

ROGER W. MARSHALL, Kansas 

DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona 

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut 

JACKY ROSEN, Nevada 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

AMI BERA, California 

DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE

HON. BRIAN BABIN, Texas, Chair 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

MO BROOKS, Alabama, 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

STEVE KNIGHT, California 

Brian Babin, Texas 

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

AMI BERA, California 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado 

MARC A. VEASEY, Texas 

DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

(III)
C O N T E N T S 

2017– 2018 

Page 

H.R. 1224—NIST Cybersecurity Framework, Assessment, and Auditing 

Act of 2017 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, March 1, 2017 .... 1 

H.R. 1430—Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act of 2017, 

or the HONEST Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, March 9, 2017 .... 39 

H.R. 1431—EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2017 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, March 9, 2017 .... 63 

H.R. 2105—NIST Small Business Cybersecurity Act of 2017 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, May 2, 2017 ........ 91 

H.R. 2809—American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 2017 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, June 8, 2017 ....... 109 

H.R. 2763—Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business 

Technology Transfer Improvements Act of 2017 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, June 22, 2017 ..... 247 

H.R. 1159—United States and Israel Space Cooperation Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, September 28, 

2017 ................................................................................................................ 305 

H.R. 4376—Department of Energy Research Infrastructure Act of 2017 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, November 15, 

2017 ................................................................................................................ 315 

H.R. 4377—Accelerating American Leadership in Science Act of 2017 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, November 15, 

2017 ................................................................................................................ 322 

H.R. 4378—Nuclear Energy Research Infrastructure Act of 2017 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, November 15, 

2017 ................................................................................................................ 327 

H.R. 4375—STEM Research and Education Effectiveness and Transparency 

Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, November 15, 

2017 ................................................................................................................ 332 

H.R. 4323—Supporting Veterans in STEM Careers Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, November 15, 

2017 ................................................................................................................ 334 

H.R. 4254—Women in Aerospace Education Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, November 15, 

2017 ................................................................................................................ 338 

H.R. 3397—Building Blocks of STEM Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, November 15, 

2017 ................................................................................................................ 343 

(IV) 
Page

V 

H.R. 4675—Low-Dose Radiation Research Act of 2017 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, January 10, 

2018 ................................................................................................................ 397 

H.R. 5345—American Leadership in Space Technology and Advanced 

Rocketry Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, March 22, 2018 .. 415 

H.R. 5346—Commercial Space Support Vehicle Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, March 22, 2018 .. 421 

H.R. 5086—Innovators to Entrepreneurs Act of 2018 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, March 22, 2018 .. 422 

(1) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUP ON H.R. 1224, 

NIST CYBERSECURITY FRAMEWORK, 

ASSESSMENT, AND AUDITING ACT OF 2017 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 1, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m., in room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. 

Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recess at 

any time, and without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare 

recesses of the Committee at any time. 

Pursuant to Committee Rule 2(e) and House Rule 112(2)(h)(4), 

the Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes. 

Today we meet to consider H.R. 1224, the NIST Cybersecurity 

Framework, Assessment, and Auditing Act of 2017. I recognize myself for an opening statement. 

In the last Congress, the Science Committee held a dozen hearings related to oversight and policy aspects of Federal cybersecurity 

issues. The hearings included the examination of data breaches at 

the Office of Personnel Management, the Internal Revenue Service 

and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. These hearings underscored the need for a robust approach to protect U.S. 

cybersecurity capabilities. 

Two weeks ago, the Research and Technology Subcommittee held 

a hearing on this issue where experts testified on recommendations 

in two recent reports that involve the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The bill we consider today, H.R. 1224, 

the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, Assessment, and Auditing Act 

of 2017, implements key ideas and strengthens Federal Government cybersecurity. I thank Representative Abraham for his initiative on this legislation. 

H.R. 1224 ensures that NIST remains a global leader in 

cybersecurity knowledge, scientific standards-setting, and research 

and analysis of Federal agencies’ cybersecurity readiness. This 

commonsense legislation takes advantage of NIST’s unique capabilities to both develop cybersecurity standards and guidelines, 

which NIST does now, and go further and evaluate and assess the 

extent of Federal agencies’ compliance with them. Creating more 
2 

working groups and guidelines without a determination of whether 

anyone is using them or using them correctly does not protect our 

cyber infrastructure. NIST has the experts who develop the standards and guidelines under the Federal Information Security Modernization Act, which apply to the Federal Government. 

NIST experts also developed a Cybersecurity Framework, 

through collaborations between government and private sector that 

are accepted and used by many private organizations to address 

and manage their cybersecurity risks in a cost-effective way. 

H.R. 1224 directs NIST to promote the Cybersecurity Framework 

by providing Federal agencies with guidance on how to implement 

it. Who better to determine if an agency is following these recognized standards than NIST? 

We do not make NIST an enforcement agency. The bill does not 

give the agency authority to exact fines, issue injunctions, or pursue further proceedings beyond assessing, auditing, and reporting. 

NIST’s assessment, audits, and the resulting reports are for Federal agencies only and will not affect the private sector. 

We recognize NIST will need resources to accomplish this work, 

and we will address that in a NIST authorization bill later this 

year. 

The Federal Government collects personally identifiable information about every person in our country. Unfortunately, the Federal 

Government is the world capital of cyber insecurity. 

Two years ago, Chinese hackers broke into OPM’s computer systems and stole the personally identifiable information and sensitive 

background check information on approximately 26 million people, 

including fingerprint records of 5.6 million individuals. Chinese 

cyber-criminals also repeatedly hacked and may still be hacking 

the FDIC computer network. The FDIC hacks threaten everything 

from large-scale manipulation of our entire financial system to 

looting individuals’ checking, savings, and retirement accounts. 

At the IRS, 2016 tax-refund fraud is projected to set a new record at $21 billion. An enterprising crook needs only a name, 

date of birth and a Social Security number to enter made-up W– 

2 information, submit a fraudulent return, and receive a refund 

from the IRS within 30 days. Unless we take new and aggressive 

steps to prevent rapidly increasing cyber-attacks by foreign criminals and unfriendly governments, our economy and national security are at risk. Not doing this is a vote for the status quo, which 

will allow continued security breaches to occur. 

Representative Abraham’s bill serves an important purpose and 

expands our ability to protect Americans from cybersecurity attacks. I again thank him for his work and I urge my colleagues to 

support H.R. 1224. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

Good morning and welcome to today’s Full Committee mark up of an important 

and timely bill. 

In the last Congress, the Science Committee held a dozen hearings related to 

oversight and policy aspects of federal cybersecurity issues. 

The hearings included the examination of data breaches at the Office of Personnel 

Management (OPM), the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Corporation (FDIC). 

These hearings underscored the need for a robust approach to protect U.S. 

cybersecurity capabilities. 
3 

Two weeks ago, the Research and Technology Subcommittee held a hearing on 

this issue where experts testified on recommendations in two recent reports that involve the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). 

The bill we consider today, H.R. 1224, the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, Assessment, and Auditing Act of 2017, implements key ideas and strengthens federal government cybersecurity. I thank Representative Abraham for his initiative on this 

legislation. 

H.R. 1224 ensures that NIST remains a global leader in cybersecurity knowledge, 

scientific standards-setting, and research and analysis of federal agencies’ cyber security readiness. 

This common sense legislation takes advantage of NIST’s unique capabilities to 

both develop cybersecurity standards and guidelines, which NIST does now, and go 

further and evaluate and assess the extent of federal agencies’ compliance with 

them. 

Creating more working groups and guidelines without a determination of whether 

anyone is using them or using them correctly does not protect our cyber infrastructure. 

NIST has the experts who develop the standards and guidelines under the Federal Information Security Modernization Act, which apply to the federal government. 

NIST experts also developed a Cybersecurity Framework, through collaborations 

between government and private sector, that are accepted and used by many private 

organizations to address and manage their cybersecurity risks in a costeffective way. 

H.R. 1224 directs NIST to promote the Cybersecurity Framework by providing 

federal agencies with guidance on how to implement it. Who better to determine if 

an agency is following these recognized standards than NIST? 

We do not make NIST an enforcement agency. The bill does not give the agency 

authority to exact fines, issue injunctions, or pursue further proceedings beyond assessing, auditing, and reporting. 

NIST’s assessment, audits, and the resulting reports are for federal agencies only 

and will not affect the private sector. 

We recognize NIST will need resources to accomplish this work. We will address 

that in a NIST authorization bill this year. 

The federal government collects personally identifiable information about every 

person in our country. Unfortunately, the federal government is the world capital 

of cyber insecurity. 

Two years ago, Chinese hackers broke into OPM’s computer systems and stole the 

personally identifiable information and sensitive background check information of 

approximately 26 million people, including fingerprint records of 5.6 million individuals. 

Chinese cyber-criminals also repeatedly hacked—and may still be hacking—the 

FDIC computer network. The FDIC hacks threaten everything from large-scale manipulation of our entire financial system to looting individuals’ checking, savings, 

and retirement accounts. 

At the IRS, 2016 tax-refund fraud is projected to set a new record at $21 billion. 

An enterprising crook needs only a name, date of birth and a Social Security number to enter made-up W-2 information, submit a fraudulent return, and receive a 

refund from the IRS within 30 days. 

Unless we take new and aggressive steps to prevent rapidly increasing cyber-attacks by foreign criminals and unfriendly governments, our economy and national 

security are at risk. 

Not doing this is a vote for the status quo, which will allow continued security 

breaches to occur. 

Representative Abraham’s bill serves an important purpose and expands our ability to protect Americans from cybersecurity attacks. I again thank him for his work 

and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1224. 

Chairman SMITH. That concludes my opening statement, and the 

gentlewoman from Texas, Eddie Bernice Johnson, the Ranking 

Member, is recognized for hers. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I understand and sympathize with the Chairman’s desire to 

move cybersecurity legislation. Cybersecurity is a critically important topic, and one that invites significant press attention. 

We had a good hearing before the Research and Technology Subcommittee just 2 weeks ago, during which we heard many good rec-
4 

ommendations from widely respected experts. Some of those recommendations fell within our Committee’s jurisdiction, and others 

did not. I do remember the panel unanimously praising NIST’s role 

in cybersecurity. I also remember discussion about developing 

metrics for the adoption of NIST’s Cybersecurity Framework. Witnesses also discussed requiring Federal agencies to incorporate the 

Framework into their information security programs. 

I can see where Mr. Abraham has attempted to incorporate some 

aspects of those recommendations into his legislation. However, I 

specifically recall GAO’s recommendation that the Department of 

Homeland Security, and not NIST, carry out surveys and assessments of the adoption and effectiveness of the Cybersecurity 

Framework. NIST itself has steadfastly maintained that they are 

the wrong agency to do it, and not just because of limited resources. I do not remember a single witness or a single expert recommendation suggesting that OSTP should be given any role in 

evaluation or oversight of cybersecurity in the private sector or the 

Federal Government. Perhaps if we substituted OMB or DHS for 

OSTP everywhere in this bill, it might make more sense. 

The Majority has inserted an entirely new agency into a policy 

matter in which they have no expertise and no business being a 

part of. In doing so, the bill also duplicates authorities and responsibilities clearly assigned to OMB and DHS in current law. 

Finally, and speaking to what may be the strangest part of this 

bill, I do not remember any expert recommending that NIST be 

given the responsibility to conduct annual cybersecurity audits of 

other agencies. NIST is not an auditing agency. They have no such 

history, expertise, or capacity. They are a standards and technology 

agency. 

In addition, a single FISMA audit costs between a few hundred 

thousand dollars to a couple of million dollars, depending on the 

size and mission of the agency. Nowhere in this bill do we provide 

NIST with the tens of millions of dollars of additional funding to 

become the cybersecurity auditing agency of the Federal Government. This is a massive unfunded mandate levied on an agency 

which is already over tasked. 

Moreover, current law already assigns this very responsibility to 

agency Inspectors General. And no expert I know of has questioned 

the quality or integrity of the Interrogatories’ work. In fact, IGs 

know and understand their own agencies’ business operations and 

information systems infrastructure better than NIST ever will. In 

short, I remain thoroughly baffled by this proposal in the legislation before us today. 

Mr. Chairman, I have said this before, and I will say it again 

here. I stand ready to collaborate and cooperate with you on 

cybersecurity legislation and oversight. We’ve been able to do so in 

the past, including for the Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2014. 

However, the bill before us today has a number of controversial 

new elements which were clearly not vetted with the cybersecurity 

community or the Administration. I will not support passage today 

of legislation which will undermine the very agency we are tasking 

with keeping our cyber infrastructure secure. 
5 

I would hope that after this markup, the Majority will take the 

time to address the concerns that have already been raised in the 

short time this bill has been publicly available. 

I thank you, and yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

I understand and sympathize with the Chairman’s desire to move cybersecurity 

legislation. Cybersecurity is a critically important topic, and one that invites significant press attention. We had a good hearing before the Research & Technology Subcommittee just two weeks ago, during which we heard many good recommendations 

from widely respected experts. Some of those recommendations fell within our Committee’s jurisdiction, others did not. 

I do remember the panel unanimously praising NIST’s role in cybersecurity. I also 

remember discussion about developing metrics for the adoption of NIST’s 

Cybersecurity Framework. Witnesses also discussed requiring Federal agencies to 

incorporate the Framework into their information security programs. 

I can see where Mr. Abraham has attempted to incorporate some aspects of those 

recommendations into his legislation. However, I specifically recall GAO’s recommendation that the Department of Homeland Security, and not NIST, carry out 

surveys and assessments of the adoption and effectiveness of the Cybersecurity 

Framework. NIST itself has steadfastly maintained that they are the wrong agency 

to do it, and not just because of limited resources. 

I do not remember a single witness, or a single expert recommendation suggesting 

that OSTP should be given any role in evaluation or oversight of cybersecurity in 

the private sector or the Federal government. Perhaps if we substituted OMB or 

DHS for OSTP everywhere in this bill, it might make more sense. The Majority has 

inserted an entirely new agency into a policy matter in which they have no expertise 

and no business being a part of. In doing so, the bill also duplicates authorities and 

responsibilities clearly assigned to OMB and DHS in current law. 

Finally, and speaking to what may be the strangest part of this bill, I do not remember any expert ever recommending that NIST be given the responsibility to 

conduct annual cybersecurity audits of other agencies. NIST is not an auditing 

agency. 

They have no such history, expertise, or capacity. They are a standards and technology agency. In addition, a single FISMA audit costs between a few hundred thousand to a couple of million dollars, depending on the size and mission of the agency. 

Nowhere in this bill do we provide NIST with the tens of millions of dollars of additional funding to become the cybersecurity auditing agency of the Federal government. This is a massive unfunded mandate levied on an agency which is already 

over tasked. Moreover, current law already assigns this very responsibility to agency 

inspectors general. And no expert I know of has questioned the quality or integrity 

of the IGs’ work. In fact, IGs know and understand their own agencies’ business operations and information systems infrastructure better than NIST ever will. In 

short, I remain thoroughly baffled by this proposal in the legislation before us today. 

Mr. Chairman, I’ve said this before, and I will say it again here. I stand ready 

to collaborate and cooperate with you on cybersecurity legislation and oversight. 

We’ve been able to do so in the past, including for the Cybersecurity Enhancement 

Act of 2014. However, the bill before us today has a number of controversial new 

elements which were clearly not vetted with the cybersecurity community or the Administration. I will not support passage today of legislation which will undermine 

the very agency we are tasking with keeping our cyber infrastructure secure. 

I would hope that after this markup, the Majority will take the time to address 

the concerns that have already been raised in the short time this bill has been publicly available. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 1224, the NIST 

Cybersecurity Framework, Assessment, and Auditing Act of 2017, 

and the clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 1224, a bill to amend the National Institute of 

Standards and Technology Act to implement a framework, assessment and audits for improving United States cybersecurity. 
6 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

I’ll recognize the sponsor of the bill, Mr. Abraham, for an opening 

statement. 

Mr. ABRAHAM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

H.R. 1224, the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, Assessment, and 

Auditing Act of 2017, is an extension of my ongoing interest over 

the state of our Nation’s cybersecurity. 

Hardly a month goes by without some news of a cyber-attack 

leading to the successful breach of millions of Americans’ financial, 

health, or other personal data. 

During an informative Research and Technology Subcommittee 

hearing 2 weeks ago, a witness reporting the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) testified, and I quote, ‘‘Cyber-based intrusions and attacks on Federal systems and systems supporting our 

Nation’s critical infrastructure, such as communications and financial services, are evolving and becoming more sophisticated.’’ The 

GAO witness also explained that ‘‘over the past several years, GAO 

has made about 2,500 recommendations to Federal agencies to enhance their information security programs and controls. As of February 2017, about 1,000 recommendations had not been implemented.’’ 

These are not pieces of information to be taken lightly. Last fall, 

this Committee marked up a bill I introduced that reflected a need 

for accountability, responsibility, and transparency by Federal 

agencies relative to their cybersecurity capabilities. The bill under 

discussion today takes the same general approach as last year’s 

bill, which the Committee approved by voice vote. H.R. 1224 also 

reflects recommendations from two recent reports that were the 

focus of the Subcommittee hearing 2 weeks ago, and I’ll give you 

some highlights of that bill that include: Amending NIST’s mission 

to emphasize the principle that expanding cyber threats require the 

engineering of security from the beginning of a system’s life cycle; 

promoting Federal implementation of the NIST Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity—that’s the Framework portion; establishing a Federal working group to develop 

quantifiable metrics to help Federal agencies analyze and assess 

the effectiveness of the Framework in protecting their information 

and information systems; directing NIST to complete an initial assessment of the cybersecurity preparedness of Federal agencies; directing NIST to initiate individual cybersecurity audits of each 

agency to assess the extent to which they are meeting the information security standards developed by the Institute; and last, providing agencies and Congress with an audit report. 

The Committee’s jurisdiction over NIST provides it the ability to 

present the Institute with the flexibility to expand its functions in 

an effort to address the cybersecurity emergency facing our Nation. 

It is to NIST’s credit that the Committee regards the Institute as 

part of the solution, and not the problem. 

H.R. 1224 reflects the Committee’s resolve to provide Federal 

agencies all the tools it may be able to use to help remedy the Federal Government’s cybersecurity shortcomings. 

It’s easy to sit back and State, with the benefit of NIST’s reputation as an exemplatory agency, that we should not consider chang-
7 

ing the way the Institute operates because of what might happen 

or how the Institute’s reputation or effectiveness might suffer. 

But the current state of affairs do not suggest that the best way 

forward is to keep taking the path of least resistance. Much as the 

nature of cyber-attacks continue to evolve to reflect the sophistication of the cyber criminals, we in the government must also be willing to evolve to protect Americans and our government. That evolution starts with thinking outside the box instead of maintaining 

a business-as-usual approach. 

H.R. 1224 establishes the Committee’s mark on a very important 

issue. It sets the tone for future cybersecurity discussions by taking 

some first steps to strengthen Federal cybersecurity defenses, and 

holding the Federal agencies accountable through regular cyber audits. 

I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. ABRAHAM

H.R. 1224, the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, Assessment, and Auditing Act of 

2017 is an extension of my ongoing interest over the state of our nation’s 

cybersecurity. 

Hardly a month goes by without some news of a cyber-attack leading to the successful breach of millions of Americans’ financial, health, or other personal data. 

During an informative Research and Technology Subcommittee hearing two weeks 

ago, a witness representing the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) testified that ‘‘Cyber-based intrusions and attacks on federal systems and systems supporting our nation’s critical infrastructure, such as communications and financial 

services, are evolving and becoming more sophisticated.’’ The GAO witness also explained that ‘‘over the past several years, GAO has made about 2,500 recommendations to federal agencies to enhance their information security programs and controls. As of February 2017, about 1,000 recommendations had not been implemented.’’ 

These are not pieces of information to be taken lightly. Last fall, this Committee 

marked up a bill I introduced that reflected a need for accountability, responsibility, 

and transparency by federal agencies relative to their cybersecurity capabilities. 

The bill under discussion today takes the same general approach as last year’s 

bill, which the Committee approved by voice vote. H.R. 1224 also reflects recommendations from two recent reports that were the focus of the Subcommittee 

hearing two weeks ago. 

Highlights of the bill include: 

• Amending NIST’s mission to emphasize the principle that expanding cyber 

threats require the engineering of security from the beginning of a system’s life 

cycle; 

• Promoting federal implementation of the NIST Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity (Framework); 

• Establishing a federal working group to develop quantifiable metrics to help 

federal agencies analyze and assess the effectiveness of the Framework in protecting their information and information systems; 

• Directing NIST to complete an initial assessment of the cybersecurity preparedness of federal agencies; 

• Directing NIST to initiate individual cybersecurity audits of each agency to assess the extent to which they are meeting the information security standards 

developed by the Institute; and 

• Providing agencies and Congress with an audit report. 

The Committee’s jurisdiction over NIST provides it the ability to present the Institute with the flexibility to expand its functions in an effort to address the 

cybersecurity emergency facing our nation. It is to NIST’s credit that the Committee 

regards the Institute as part of the solution, and not the problem. H.R. 1224 reflects 

the Committee’s resolve to provide federal agencies all the tools it may be able to 

use to help remedy the federal government’s cybersecurity shortcomings. 

It is easy to sit back and state, with the benefit of NIST’s reputation as an exemplary agency, that we should not consider changing the way the Institute operates 

because of what might happen or how the Institute’s reputation or effectiveness 

might suffer. 
8 

But the current state of affairs do not suggest that the best way forward is to 

keep taking the path of least resistance. Much as the nature of cyber-attacks continue to evolve to reflect the sophistication of the cyber criminals, we in the government must also be willing to evolve to protect Americans and our government. That 

evolution starts with thinking outside the box instead of maintaining a business as 

usual approach. 

H.R. 1224 establishes the Committee’s mark on a very important issue. It sets the 

tone for future cybersecurity discussions by taking some first steps to strengthen 

federal cybersecurity defenses, and holding federal agencies accountable through 

regular cyber audits. 

I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Abraham. 

We will now proceed with amendments in the order listed on the 

roster. The first amendment is going to be the Manger’s Amendment, and the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 1224 offered by Mr. Smith of 

Texas, amendment #008. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read, and I’ll recognize myself to explain the Manager’s 

Amendment. 

This amendment makes some edits for consistency and clarity. 

The amendment adds the Office of Management and Budget, OMB, 

to the Federal Working Group established and chaired by NIST 

and specifies the involvement of OMB in developing and publishing 

the annual report based on information compiled by the Federal 

Working Group. 

These commonsense additions will ensure the Federal Working 

Group has the best representation to effectively guide Federal 

agencies and that its reports have the weight of the White House 

behind it. 

OMB’s role under the Federal Information Security Modernization means the Office is familiar with agency cybersecurity reporting requirements. 

These edits further improve an already good bill, and I urge my 

colleagues to support the amendment. 

Is there further discussion on the amendment? The gentlewoman 

from Texas. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I move to 

strike the last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I oppose this amendment. As I noted in my opening statement, I oppose the underlying bill. This amendment 

doesn’t do anything to fix the underlying problems with the bill, 

and in one instance might actually make the bill worse. 

I’m happy to see that you’re adding OMB to at least somewhere 

in some of what belongs in the bill. However, your amendment does 

nothing to fix the inappropriate inclusion of OSTP in the bill while 

the last paragraph of the amendment will be moot if Mr. Abraham’s amendment is accepted. That paragraph has implications beyond this bill, so I want to register my concerns thereto. 

The last paragraph contains a blanket prohibition on the use of 

any information collected under this bill for the purposes of oversight and promulgation of regulations. While I appreciate the desire to engage with industry openly, blanket prohibitions on the use 

of information seem to me to be shortsighted. 
9 

The pitfalls associated with forcing the government to ignore 

data in a field as vitally important as our national security or 

cybersecurity seem too numerous to count. The Majority spent 

much of the last Congress taking the Administration to task for 

various cybersecurity issues. To now force the government to ignore 

relevant cybersecurity information seems like a mechanism to ensure the government fails in the future. That seems like a bad idea 

to me. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

Is there any further discussion on the amendment? 

If not, the question is on agreeing to the Manager’s Amendment. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Those opposed, say no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

The next amendment on the roster is offered by the gentleman 

from Louisiana, Dr. Abraham, and does the gentleman wish to be 

recognized? 

Mr. ABRAHAM. No, sir, I’m good. 

Chairman SMITH. I think you may have an amendment at the 

desk. 

Mr. ABRAHAM. OK. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 1224 offered by Mr. Abraham of 

Louisiana, amendment #021. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. ABRAHAM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

My amendment strikes the public-private working group provision and any reference to it and the accompanying report. The language was developed as a natural extension of a similar provision 

for a Federal working group established to help Federal agencies 

determine the effectiveness of the Framework in protecting Federal 

information systems. 

However, since most of the bill focuses on the Committee’s concern with making Federal cybersecurity system more secure, I believe this provision aimed at helping private entities would be better addressed in a separate legislative vehicle. 

The work of this Committee over the past few years and the testimony from witnesses 2 weeks ago in the Research and Technology 

Subcommittee hearing reinforce the need for us to focus on Federal 

agency issues. And you heard Chairman Smith describe the Committee’s review of specific agencies, namely the Office of Personnel 

Management and the IRS and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. 

I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I yield 

back. 

Chairman SMITH. I appreciate the gentleman’s amendment, and 

I recommend it to my colleagues. 

And is there any further discussion on the amendment? 

If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by 

Mr. Abraham. 

All in favor, say aye. 
10 

Those opposed, say no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

The next amendment on the roster is going to be offered by the 

gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Lipinski, and he is recognized for that 

purpose. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman, I have a revised amendment at the 

desk. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 1224 offered by Mr. Lipinski of 

Illinois, amendment #013. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you. 

Cybersecurity is a real and growing challenge for our government, businesses and individuals. While new authorities for information sharing on cyber threats, the increased investments in network security have been put in place, we continue to see 

vulnerabilities get exploited, our systems or devices hacked, and 

cyber intrusions occur. These often lead to significant cost or security consequences. 

While Federal agencies have been tasked to develop 

cybersecurity systems based on their individual agency risk assessments, little has been done to assure the effective implementation 

of cyber protections based on those risk determinations or even 

that those risks are adequately characterized. 

We tend to be reminded of this any time a Federal agency is the 

target of a major hack. So I agree there’s legitimate needs to conduct regular oversight and to audit agency risk assessments in 

cybersecurity implementation. But I’m not convinced that NIST or 

at least NIST alone is the appropriate agency for this task for a 

few reasons. 

First, while the Institute is capable of supporting the development of a cyber framework and standards, conducting audits would 

be a different task. It would require a larger work force with new 

skill sets and expertise in computer security, audit methodologies, 

and more. Other agencies such as the GAO are more experienced 

in conducting audits while Inspectors General are going to have 

greater understanding of other respective agencies’ business models, computer networks and services that would allow for more 

comprehensive audit. 

There are also concerns that having NIST develop cybersecurity 

framework for private-sector entities could be perceived as oversight or regulatory approach which could turn private parties away 

from working with the Institute and other technical standards and 

activities. 

I believe that this concern has been addressed in part at least 

through Mr. Abraham’s amendment. 

Finally, over the last few years, an array of new cyber authorities, information-sharing regimes and technical capabilities have 

been stood up by legislation and executive action, which appear to 

not be integrated into the bill we have before us. 

We passed the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act 14 months 

ago to enable threat-based cybersecurity information to be shared 
11 

between private entities and the U.S. Government. DHS has continued to develop its EINSTEIN system to detect and block cyber 

intrusions at Federal agencies and to use that threat information 

to better protect the rest of the government. DHS is also tasked 

with working alongside the private sector to protect private and 

public critical infrastructure including cyber-based systems. It is 

also joint lead agencies with NIST in developing a better qualified 

cyber work force. 

I think we should be cautious in adding to NIST this new 

cyber—these new cyber responsibilities without considering how we 

integrate them with other existing cybersecurity programs across 

our government. 

What my amendment would do is before conducting the audits, 

direct the Institute to first develop a plan for how it would carry 

out the very broad and intensive work of cyber auditing of every 

Federal department. We should know how much manpower this 

will take, what it will cost, where and if such expertise exists in 

the Federal Government at NIST or elsewhere, or if there will be 

a need to contract out this type of work. We also need to know 

what type of methods or approach NIST and/or other agencies 

would use in conducting cyber audits. Once the Institute has developed that plan and sent it to Congress, we’ll know the cost and requirements to fulfill this task and support NIST effectively in carrying out its mission. 

My amendment had originally sought to delay the onset of the 

audits so that it would follow the plan, but I understand the Chairman’s interest in the audits commencing as soon as possible. I hope 

we can continue to work to perfect this as the bill moves ahead. 

We do not want to ask NIST or any other agency to take on the 

vital task of assuring our Federal agencies have prepared their networks to be safe but then provide it with the manpower, funding, 

expertise or knowledge to do the job right the first time. We have 

seen far too many times computer network security get shorted in 

attention and resources and then we complain about the outcomes. 

We should not do that now, and this amendment will help to hopefully ensure that we do not do that here. 

So I ask for support of this amendment, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski. I appreciate the 

thoughtful amendment, and I recommend it to my colleagues, and 

yes, we will continue our discussions on the general subject. 

Is there any further discussion on the amendment? 

If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by 

Mr. Lipinski. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Those opposed, say no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

The next amendment on the roster will be offered by the gentleman from Illinois, Dr. Foster, and he is recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment is from 

myself and Mr. Takano, and it simply asks—— 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 1224 offered by Mr. Foster of Illinois, amendment #010. 
12 

Chairman SMITH. And without objection, the amendment will be 

considered as read. I’m going to reserve a point of order against the 

amendment for being non-germane but nevertheless the gentleman 

is recognized to explain the amendment. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

This amendment is from myself and Mr. Takano, and it simply 

adds a sense of Congress that the Office of Technology Assessment, 

or OTA, should be reinstated. For more than two decades, the OTA 

provided relevant, unbiased and technical and scientific assessments for Members of Congress and their staff, and although the 

OTA remains authorized to this day, foolishly, the Office was 

defunded in 1995, stripping Congress of a valuable resource that 

understood emerging technologies as well as the intricacies of the 

legislative process and the needs of policymakers. 

The expertise provided by the OTA saved taxpayers billions of 

dollars by identifying cost-effective areas for future investment and 

avoiding wasting money on technologies and policies that did not 

and could not work. The OTA’s 24-year body of work encompasses 

some 750 reports and assessments on issues as far-ranging as arms 

control to bioterrorism to computer network and security and privacy issues. Interestingly, the last report the OTA issued was on 

network security and privacy issues and was published in 1995, 

just before it was defunded. Imagine how useful such a report 

would have been if it could have been paid attention to and updated through today. 

As technology continues to advance and non-defense budgets continue to shrink, this sort of trustworthy, nonpartisan analysis is no 

less necessary today than it was when the OTA was first started 

over 40 years ago. 

We cannot slow down the rapid pace of technology but we can 

give ourselves back an important and proven tool. Congress needs 

the OTA now more than ever, and what we should be talking about 

is this rather than other things we’re discussing today. And if we 

really want to get ahead of the next cybersecurity threats, we 

should be doing everything we can to make informed policy decisions. Instead of straining the authority and the resources of NIST 

just so this Committee can claim that we did something relevant 

about cybersecurity, we should be making smart policy with input 

from nonpartisan experts. This is exactly what the Office of Technology Assessment used to do, and I’m very grateful to my colleague on the Committee, Mr. Takano, for his efforts in this area 

and for cosponsoring this amendment as well as to my colleague, 

Mr. Chaffetz of Utah, who has worked with me for several years 

advocating for the OTA. 

And I’d now like to yield 1 minute to my cosponsor, Mr. Takano. 

Mr. TAKANO. Thank you, Mr. Foster. 

I have been proud to work with you in raising awareness and 

support for the Office of Technology Assessment, or OTA. 

As you say, for more than two decades OTA provided unbiased 

technical and scientific assessments for Members of Congress and 

staff. The OTA was defunded in 1995, stripping Congress of a valuable resource. Twenty years later, many of the topics OTA studied 

are still relevant today. I certainly believe that we would be better 
13 

able to tackle the complexity of an issue like cybersecurity if we 

had OTA today. 

This amendment expresses the sense of Congress that OTA 

should be funded. In a world of alternative facts, the unbiased and 

thorough analysis of OTA provided—that the OTA provided is more 

important than ever. 

I yield back to Mr. Foster. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, Mr. Takano. 

Mr. Chairman, I understand that we are unlikely to have the 

votes to prevail against your technical point of order against this 

amendment and so I hereby withdraw my amendment, but I do 

urge my colleagues to think critically about the time and money 

that we could have saved rather than legislating for an uncertain 

and poorly understood future of technology, and urge my colleagues 

to work every way we can to try to restore funding for the OTA. 

Thank you, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Mr. Foster, Mr. Takano, thank you for your 

comments. As tempted as I am to support an amendment that 

would allow the President to appoint more individuals, I nevertheless appreciate the gentleman withdrawing the amendment. Without objection, it is withdrawn. 

Are there any further amendments? 

If not, a reporting quorum being present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 1224 to the 

House as amended with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 1224 to the House 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably—— 

Ms. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman from Texas. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I’d like to request a record vote on this. 

Chairman SMITH. A roll call vote has been requested. Without 

objection, the clerk will call the roll. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith? 

Chairman SMITH. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith votes aye. 

Mr. Lucas? 

Mr. LUCAS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lucas votes aye. 

Mr. Rohrabacher? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Rohrabacher votes aye. 

Mr. Brooks? 

Mr. BROOKS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Brooks votes aye. 

Mr. Hultgren? 

Mr. HULTGREN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Hultgren votes aye. 

Mr. Posey? 

Mr. POSEY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Posey votes aye. 
14 

Mr. Massey? 

Mr. MASSEY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Massey votes aye. 

Mr. Bridenstine? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber? 

Mr. WEBER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber votes aye. 

Mr. Knight? 

Mr. KNIGHT. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Knight votes aye. 

Mr. Babin? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mrs. Comstock? 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Comstock votes aye. 

Mr. Palmer? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Loudermilk? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Abraham? 

Mr. ABRAHAM. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Abraham votes aye. 

Mr. LaHood? 

Mr. LAHOOD. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. LaHood votes aye. 

Mr. Webster? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Banks? 

Mr. BANKS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Banks votes aye. 

Mr. Biggs? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Marshall? 

Mr. MARSHALL. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Marshall votes aye. 

Mr. Dunn? 

Mr. DUNN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Dunn votes aye. 

Mr. Higgins? 

Mr. HIGGINS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Higgins votes aye. 

Ms. Johnson? 

Ms. JOHNSON. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson votes no. 

Ms. Lofgren? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Lipinski? 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lipinski votes aye. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

Ms. BONAMICI. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Bonamici votes no. 

Mr. Bera? 
15 

Mr. BERA. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Bera votes no. 

Ms. Esty? 

Ms. ESTY. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Esty votes no. 

Mr. Veasey? 

Mr. VEASEY. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Veasey votes no. 

Mr. Beyer? 

Mr. BEYER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Beyer votes no. 

Ms. Rosen? 

Ms. ROSEN. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Rosen votes no. 

Mr. McNerney? 

Mr. MCNERNEY. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. McNerney votes no. 

Mr. Perlmutter? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Perlmutter votes no. 

Mr. Tonko? 

Mr. TONKO. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Tonko votes no. 

Mr. Foster? 

Mr. FOSTER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Foster votes no. 

Mr. Takano? 

Mr. TAKANO. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Takano votes no. 

Ms. Hanabusa? 

Ms. HANABUSA. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Hanabusa votes no. 

Mr. Crist? 

Mr. CRIST. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Crist votes no. 

Mr. Babin? 

Mr. BABIN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Babin votes aye. 

Mr. Loudermilk? 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Loudermilk votes aye. 

Mr. CHAIRMAN. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the vote. 

The CLERK. Mr. Chairman, 19 Members voted aye and 14 Members voted no. 
16 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY -1151

h 

Full Committee Roll Call 

Working Quorum: 13 Reporting Quorum: 20 

DATE: 3/1/17 

Bill: H.R. 1224 Final Passage 

MEMBER AYE NO PRESENT NOT VOTING 

1 Mr. SMITH, Chair- TX X 

2 Mr. LUCAS- OK •• X 

3 Mr. ROHRAB,At'l-l~ l- CA X 

4 Mr. BROOKS- AL X 

5 Mr. HULTGREN -IL X 

6 Mr. POSEY- FL X 

7 Mr. MASSIE - KY X 

8 Mr. .,KIUt:N~ I tNt:: - OK 

9 Mr. WEBER - TX X 

10 Mr. KNIGHT- CA X 

11 Mr. BABIN - TX X 

12 Mrs.COMS)u~r<-VA X 

13 Mr. PALMER- AL 

14 Mr. nllnJ:DIUIII w;- GA X 

15 Mr. I-LA X 

16 Mr. LAHOOD -/L X 

17 Mr. VYCIO;:)ICrt-FL 

18 Mr. BANKS -IN X 

19 Mr. BIGGS-AZ 

20 Mr. .-KS X 

21 Mr. DUNN - FL X 

22 Mr. HIGGINS- LA X 

1 Ms . .JUMN~UN, Rankina - TX X 

2 Ms. '-CA 

3 Mr. LIPINSKI- IL X 

4 Ms. 1-0R X 

5 Mr. BERA- CA X 

6 Ms. ESTY - CT X 

7 Mr. VEASEY - TX X 

8 Mr. BEYER- VA X 

9 Ms. ROSEN - NV X 

110 Mr. r-CA X 

I 11 Mr. PERLMUTTER- CO X 

I 12 Mr. TONKO- NY X 

113 Mr. FOSTER -IL X 

114 Mr. TAKANO- CA X 

115 Ms. I-IAo.JARII«.f\-H/ X 

I 16 Mr. CRIST- FL X 

117 VACANT 

TOTALS I 

•• Vice Chair 
17 

Chairman SMITH. The ayes have it, and H.R. 1224 is reported favorably to the House as amended. 

Without objection, the Motion to Reconsider is laid upon the 

table. H.R. 1224 is ordered reported to the House. 

I ask unanimous consent that staff authorized to make any necessary technical and conforming changes. Without objection, so ordered. 

If there is no further discussion, that completes our business, 

and this concludes the Science Committee markup. Without objection, the Committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 10:37 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(19) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 1224, AMENDMENT ROSTER, SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS, 

LETTER OF SUPPORT
20 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\CYBER17 _Ol.XML 

(Original Signature of Member) 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H.R. 

To amend the National Institute of Standards and 'l'echnology Act to implement a framPwork, assessment, and audits for improving United States 

cybersecurity. 

IN THE HOUSE OF' REPRESENTATIVES 

Mr. ABRAIIAM introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on-----------------

A BILL 

To amend the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act to implement a framework, assessment, and 

audits for improving United States cybersecurity. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep1·esenta2 tives of the United States of AmeTica in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "NIST Cyberseeurity 

5 Framework, Assessment, and Auditing Act of 2017". 

G:\VHLC\022317\022317 .1 03.xml 

February 23, 2017 (2:37 p.m.) 

(851454121) 
21 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\CYBER17 _Ol.XML 

2 

1 SEC. 2. NIST MISSION TO ADDRESS CYBERSECURITY 

2 THREATS. 

3 Section 20(a)(1) of the National Institute of Stand4 ards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-3(a)(1)) is 

5 amended by inserting ", emphasizing the principle that ex6 panding cybersecurity threats require engineering security 

7 from the beginning of an information system's life cycle, 

8 building more trustworthy and secure components and 

9 systems from the start, and applying well-defined security 

10 design principles throughout" before the semicolon. 

11 SEC. 3. IMPLEMENTATION OF CYBERSECURITY FRAME12 WORK. 

13 The National Institute of Standards and Technology 

14 Act (15 U.S.C. 271 et seq.) is amended by inserting after 

15 section 20 the following: 

16 "SEC. 20A. FRAMEWORK FOR IMPROVING CRITICAL INFRA17 STRUCTURE CYBERSECURITY. 

18 "(a) IMPLEMENTATION BY FEDERAL AGENCIES.-

19 "(1) IN GENERAI,.-The Institute shall promote 

20 the implementation by Federal agencies of the 

21 ]1-,ramework for Improving Critical Infrastructure 

22 Cybersecurity (in this section and section 20B re23 ferred to as the 'Framework') by providing to the 

24 Office of Management aud Budget, the Office of 

25 Science and Technology Policy, and all other Federal 

26 agencies, not later than 6 months after the date of 

G:\VHLC\022317\022317.103.xml 

February 23, 2017 (2:37p.m.) 

(651454121) 
22 

G:\CMrE\S015\CYBER 17 _OI.XML 

enactment of the NIST Gybersecurity Framework, 

2 Assessment, and Auditing Act of 2017, guidance 

3 that :B1

ederal agencies may use to incorporate the 

4 Framework into their information security risk man5 agemcnt efforts, including practices related to com6 pliance with chapter 35 of title 44, United States 

7 Code, and any other applicable Federal law. 

8 "(2) GUIDANCE.-The guidance required under 

9 paragraph ( 1) shall10 "(A) describe how the Framework aligns 

11 vvith or augments existing agency practices re12 lated to compliance with chapter 35 of title 44, 

13 United States Code, and any other applicable 

14 Federal law; 

15 "(B) identify any areas of conflict or over16 lap between the Framework and existing 

17 cybersecurity requirements, including gap areas 

18 where additional policies, standards, guidelines, 

19 or programs may be needed to encourage Fed20 cral agencies to use the Framework and im21 prove the ability of Federal agencies to manage 

22 cybersccurity risk; 

23 "(C) include a template for Federal agcn24 cies on how to use the Framework, and rec25 ommend procedures for streamlining and harG:\VHLC\022317\022317.103.xml 

February 23, 2017 (2:37p.m.) 

(651454121) 
23 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\CYBER17_01.XML 

4 

monizing existing and future cybersecurity-re2 lated requirements, in support of the goal of 

3 using the .B~ramework to supplant Federal agen4 cy practices in compliance with chapter 35 of 

5 title 44, United States Code; 

6 "(D) recommend other procedures for com7 pliance with cybersecurity reporting, oversight, 

8 and policy review and creation requirements 

9 under such chapter 35 and any other applicable 

10 Federal law; and 

11 "(E) be updated, as the Institute considers 

12 necessary, to reflect what the Institute learns 

13 from ongoing research, the audits conducted 

14 pursuant to section 20B(b), the information 

15 compiled by the Federal working group estab16 lished pursuant to paragraph (3), the informa17 tion compiled by the public-private working 

18 group established pursuant to subsection (b)(l), 

19 the annual reports published pursuant to para20 graph ( 4), and the annual reports published 

21 pursuant to subsection (b)(2). 

22 "(3) FBDimAL WORKING GROUP.-Not later 

23 than 3 months after the date of enactment of the 

24 NIST Cybersecurity Framework, Assessment, and 

25 Auditing Act of 2017, the Institute shall establish 

G:\VHLC\0223171022317.103.xml 

February 23, 2017 (2:37p.m.) 

(651454121) 
24 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\CYBER17_01.XML 

5 

1 and chair a working group (in this section referred 

2 to as the 'Federal working group'), including rep3 resentatives of the Office of Science and Technology 

4 Policy and other appropriate Federal agencies, which 

5 shall6 "(A) not later than 6 months after the 

7 date of enactment of the NIS'f Cybersecurity 

8 Framework, Assessment, and Auditing Act of 

9 2017, develop outcome-based and quantifiable 

10 metrics, in coordination with the public-private 

11 working group established pursuant to sub12 section (b), to help ~~ederal agencies m their 

13 analysis and assessment of the effectiveness of 

14 the Framework in protecting their information 

15 and information systems; 

16 "(B) update such metrics as the Federal 

17 working group considers necessary; 

18 "(C) compile information from Federal 

19 agencies on their use of the Framework and the 

20 results of the analysis and assessment described 

21 in subparagraph (A); and 

22 "(D) assist the Office of Science and 'fech23 nology Policy in publishing the annual report 

24 required under paragraph ( 4). 

G:\VHLC\022317\022317.103.xml 

February 23, 2017 (2:37 p.m.) 

(651454121) 
25 

G:\CMfE\SC\15\CYBER\7 _Ol.XML 

6 

1 "( 4) REPORT.-The Office of Science and 

2 Technology Policy shall develop and make publicly 

3 available an annual report on agency adoption rates 

4 and the effectiveness of the Framework. In preS paring such report, the Office shall use the informa6 tion compiled by the Federal working group pursu7 ant to paragraph (3)(C). 

8 "(b) IMPLEMENTATION BY PRIVATE ENTITIES.-

9 "(1) PUBLIC-PRIVATE WORKING GROUP.-Not 

10 later than 6 months after the date of enactment of 

11 the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, Assessment, 

12 and Auditing Act of 2017, the Institute shall, in co13 ordination with industry stakeholders, establish a 

14 working group (in this section referred to as the 

15 'public-private working group') which shall16 "(A) not later than 1 year after the date 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

G:\VHLC\022317\022317.103.xml 

February 23, 2017 (2:37 p.m.) 

of enactment of the NIST Cybersecurity 

l<"ramework, Assessment, and Auditing Act of 

2017, develop specific Framework implementation models and measurement tools that private 

entities can use to adopt the l<"'ramework; 

"(B) not later than 1 year after the date 

of enactment of the NIST Cybersecurity 

:B'ramework, Assessment, and Auditing Act of 

2017, develop, in coordination with the Federal 

(651454121) 
26 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\CYBERl?_Ol.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

G:\VHLC\022317\022317.1 03.xml 

February 23, 2017 (2:37p.m.) 

7 

working group, industry-led, consensus and outcome-based metrics that quantify the effectiveness and benefits of the Framework to enable 

private entities to voluntarily analyze and assess their individual corporate cybersecurity 

risks; 

"(C) update the models and tools developed pursuant to subparagraph (A) and the 

metrics developed pursuant to subparagraph 

(B), as the public-private working group considers necessary; 

"(D) compile information, derived from the 

metrics developed pursuant to subparagraph 

(B), voluntarily submitted by private entities on 

their use of the .B'ramework and on the effectiveness and benefits of such use; 

"(E) analyze the information compiled 

pursuant to subparagraph (D) and provide such 

information and analysis to-

"(i) the Institute, for the purpose of 

enabling the Institute to make improvements to the .B'ramework; and 

"(ii) private entities, for the purpose 

of providing such entities with a greater 

understanding of the benefits of the 

(651454121) 
27 

G:\CMTE\SQ15\CYBER17 _Ol.XML 

8 

Framework to enable them to use the 

2 Framework more effectively to improve 

3 their eyberseeurity; and 

4 "(F) assist the Office of Science and Tech5 nology Policy in publishing the annual report 

6 required under paragraph (2). 

7 "(2) REPORT.-The Office of Seience and 

8 Technology Policy shall develop and make publicly 

9 available an annual report on industry adoption 

10 rates and the effectiveness of the Framework. In 

11 preparing such report, the Office shall use informa12 tion compiled by the public-private working group 

13 pursuant to paragraph (1) (D). 

14 "SEC. 20B. CYBERSECURITY AUDITS. 

15 "(a) INI'ri.Al, ASSESSMENT.-

16 "(1) REQUIREMENT.-Not later than 6 months 

17 after the date of enactment of the NIST 

18 Cybersecurity Framework, Assessment, and Auditing 

19 Act of 2017, the Institute shall complete an initial 

20 assessment of the cybersecurity preparedness of the 

21 agencies described in paragraph (2). Such assess22 ment shall be based on information security stand23 ards developed under section 20, and may also be in24 formed by work done or reports published by other 

25 Federal agencies or officials. 

G:\ VHLC\022317\022317.1 03.xml 

February 23, 2017 (2:37p.m.) 

(651454121) 
28 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\CYBER 17 _0 l.XML 

9 

"(2) AGENCIES.-The agenmes referred to in 

2 paragraph (1) are the agencies referred to in section 

3 901(b) of title 31, United States Code, and any 

4 other ag-ency that has reported a major incident (as 

5 defined in the Office of Management and Budget 

6 Memorandum-16-03, published on October 30, 

7 2015, or any successor document). 

8 "(3) N1\TIONAL SECURITY SYSTEiviS.-The re9 quirernent under paragraph (1) shall not apply to 

10 national security systems (as defined in section 

11 3552(b) of title 44, United States Code). 

12 "(b) AUDITS.-

13 "(1) REQUmEMENT.-Not later than 6 months 

14 after the date of enactment of the NIST 

15 Cybersecurity Framework, Assessment, and Auditing 

16 Act of 2017, the Institute shall initiate an individual 

17 cybersecurity audit of each agency described in sub18 section (a)(2), to assess the extent to which the 

19 agency is meeting the information security standards 

20 developed under section 20. 

21 "(2) RELATION TO FRAJ.VIEWORK.-Audits con22 ducted under this subsection shall23 "(A) to the extent applicable and available, 

24 be informed by the report on agency adoption 

G:IVHLC\022317\022317.1 03.xml 

February 23, 2017 (2:37 p.m.) 

(651454121) 
29 

G:\CMTE\Sal5\CYBER17_01.XML 

10 

rates and the effectiveness of the Framework 

2 described in section 20A(a)(4); and 

3 

4 

5 

6 

"(B) if the agency is required by law or executive order to adopt the :F'ramework, be based 

on the guidance described in section 20A(a)(2) 

and metrics developed under section 

7 20A(a)(3)(A). 

8 "(3) SCHEDULE.-The Institute shall establish 

9 a schedule for completion of audits under this sub1 0 section to ensure that11 "(A) audits of agencies whose information 

12 security risk is high, based ou the assessment 

13 conducted under subsection (a), are completed 

14 not later than 1 year after the date of enact15 ment of the NIST Cybersecurity Framework, 

16 Assessment, and Auditing Act of 2017, and are 

17 audited annually thereafter; and 

18 "(B) audits of all other agencies described 

19 m subsection (a)(2) are completed not later 

20 than 2 years after the date of enactment of the 

21 NIST Cybersecurity Framework, Assessment, 

22 and Auditing Act of 2017, and are audited bi23 ennially thereafter. 

G:\VHLC\022317\022317.1 03.xml 

February 23, 2017 (2:37p.m.) 

(651454121) 
30 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\CYBER17 _Ol.XML 

11 

" ( 4) REPORT. -A report of each audit con2 ducted under this subsection shall be transmitted by 

3 the Institute to4 "(A) the Office of Management and Budg5 et; 

6 "(B) the Office of Science and Technology 

7 Policy; 

8 "(C) the Government Accountability Of9 fice; 

10 "(D) the agency being audited; 

11 "(E) the Inspector General of such agency, 

12 if there is one; and 

13 "(F) Congress, including the Committee on 

14 Science, Space, and Technology of the House of 

15 Representatives and the Committee on Com16 merce, Science, and Transportation of the Sen17 ate.". 

G:\VHLC\022317\022317.1 03.xml 

February 23, 2017 (2:37p.m.) 

(651454121) 
31 

G:\M\15\SMITIX\SMITIX_OOS.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 

OFFERED BY MR. SMITH OF TEXAS 

Page 5, lines 3-4, strike "Office of Science and 

Technology Policy" and insert "Office of .Management 

and Budget, the Office of Science and Technology Policy,". 

Page 5, line 22, insert "the Office of Management 

and Budget and" before "the Office". 

Page 6, line 1, insert "the Office of Management 

and Budget and" before "the Office". 

Page 6, line 13, insert "and chair" after "establish". 

Page 6, lines 20-21, strike "that private entities can 

use to adopt" and insert "for private entity use of''. 

Page 8, line 9, strike "adoption" and insert "utilization". 

Page 8, line 13, insert "None of this information 

shall be used for purposes of oversight or promulgation 

of regulations by any }l'ederal regulatory ag·ency." after 

"paragraph (1)(D).". 

g:\VHLC\022717\022717.301.xml 

February 27,2017 (9:03p.m.) 

(65273012) 
32 

G:\M\15\ABRALA\ABRALA_021.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 

OFFERED BY MR. ABRAHAM OF LOUISIANA 

Page 4, lines 16-18, strike "the information compiled by the public-private working group established pursuant to subsection (b)(1)," and insert "and". 

Page 4, lines 20-21, strike ", and the annual reports 

published pursuant to subsection (h)(2)". 

Page 5, lines 10-12, strike ", in coordination with 

the public-private working group established pursuant to 

subsection (b),". 

Page 6, line 8, through page 8, line 13, strike subsection (b) and redesignate the preceding provisions accordingly. 

g:\VH LC\022717\022717.304.xml 

February 27, 2017 (9:09 p.m.) 

(65276513) 
33 

G:\M\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_013.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. __ 

OFFERED BY MR. LIPINSKI OF ILLINOIS 

Page 9, after line 11, insert the following: 

1 (b) AUDIT PLAN.-Not later than 6 months after the 

2 date of enactment of this Act, the Institute shall prepare 

3 a needs-based plan for carrying out the audits of agencies 

4 as required under subsection (c). Such plan shall include 

5 a description of staffing plans, workforce capabilities, 

6 methods for conducting such audits, coordination with 

7 agencies to support such audits, expected timeframes for 

8 the completion of audits, and other information the Insti9 tute considers relevant. The plan shall be transmitted by 

10 the Institute to the congressional entities described in sub11 section (c)(4)(F1

). 

Page 9, line 12, strike "(b)" and insert "(c)". 

G:\VHLC\022817\022817.285.xml 

February 28, 2017 (8:47 p.m.} 

(65278413} 
34 

G:\M\15\FOSTER\FOSTER_OlO.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 

OFFERED BY MR. FOSTER OF ILLINOIS 

Page 11, after line 17, add at the end the following: 

SEC. 4. OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT. 

2 It is the sense of Congress that3 (1) the legislative process would greatly benefit 

4 from once again having an office dedicated to giving 

5 nonpartisan, technical advice to Congress; 

6 (2) the Office of Technology Assessment rep7 resents a cost-effective improvement to the govern8 ance of our country; and 

9 (3) funding should be restored to the Office of 

10 Technology Assessment. 

g:\VHLC\0227171022717.266.xml 

February 27.2017 (5:04p.m.) 

(65273612) 
35 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF H.R. 1224, NIST CYBERSECURITY FRAMEWORK, 

ASSESSMENT, AND AUDITING ACT OF 2017 
36 

House Committee on Science, Space, ond Technology 

voluntarily analyze and assess their individual corporate cybersecurity risks. The publicprivate working group will develop these metrics in coordination with the Federal working 

group described above. The public-private working group shall be established within six 

months of the bill's enactment, and the models and measurement tools, as well as the 

metrics, shall be developed not later than one year after the bill's enactment. The publicprivate working group shall compile information voluntarily submitted by private entities on 

their use of the Framework and on the effectiveness and benefits of such use. This 

information will help NIST make improvements to the Framework and assist private entities 

to better understand the benefits of the Framework so they use it more effectively. The 

compiled information shall be published in an annual report by OSTP. 

SEC. 20B. Cybersecurity Audits: 

ASSESSMENT --Directs NIST to complete an initial assessment of the cybersecurity 

preparedness of the 24 CFO-Act Federal agencies, and any other Federal agencies that have 

reported a major cybersecurity incident, based on the information security standards 

developed by NIST, not later than 6 months after the bill's enactment into law. This 

assessment may also be informed by work done or reports published by other Federal 

agencies or officials. 

AUDITS-- Not later than six months after the bill's enactment into law, directs the Institute 

to initiate individual cybersecurity audits of each agency covered under the initial group 

assessment to determine the extent to which each agency is meeting the information security 

standards developed by the Institute. 

SCHEDULE --Directs NIST to establish a schedule for these audits based on the initial 

assessment. Agencies whose information security risk is high, shall have audits completed 

not later than one year after the bill's enactment into law, and then annually thereafter. 

Agencies that do not fall into this category shall have the initial audit completed no later 

than two years after the bill's enactment, and then biennially thereafter. 

RELATION TO FRAMEWORK-- If Federal agencies are required by law or Executive 

Order to implement the Framework, then the NIST audits of each agency shall be based on 

the guidance it provides to agencies (described above) and the metrics developed by the 

Federal working group (described above). 

AUDIT REPORT-- A report of each Federal agency audit shall be transmitted to OMB, 

OSTP, the U.S. Government Accountability Office, the agency being audited, the agency's 

Office of Inspector General if it has one, and Congress, including the House Science, Space, 

and Technology Committee and the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation. 

Page 2 of 2 
37 

LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR H.R. 1224 

~ INTERNET 

SECURITY 

ALLIANCE 

PRESS RELEASE 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

Larry Clinton 

President and CEO, Internet Security Alliance 

(202) 236-0001 

lclinton@isalliance.org 

March 1, 2017 

ISA SEES BILL ON NIST FRAMEWORK AS STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION 

(WASHINGTON, D.C.)- The Internet Security Alliance said today that the legislation the House Science 

Committee is scheduled to consider this week is a step in the right direction, and that it hopes to work 

with the Committee to refine it as it moves forward through the legislative process. 

The bill calls on NIST to define what constitutes use of the NIST Cybersecurity Framework and develop 

outcome-based and quantifiable metrics to help federal agencies analyze and assess the effectiveness of 

the Framework. 

"Given the increasing severity of the cyber threat, it is essential that we clarify basic elements of the 

Framework, such as defining what it means to use the Framework and what it means to be effective,' said 

Larry Clinton, President of the !SA. "This bill takes the important first steps to resolve these problems and 

allows the private sector the opportunity to voluntarily follow as they see fit." 

ISA has long called for evaluating the Framework for not only effectiveness and prioritization, but also 

cost-effectiveness, as called for in President Obama's Executive Order 13636, and is encouraged by the 

Committee's work. While the bill does not call for a cost-benefit analysis, it does call for developing a 

template for federal agencies on how to use the Framework, which the private sector could, in effect, 

voluntarily adopt as implementation models and modify for use for their particular sector. 

"We are long past the time where we can rely on anecdotal reports from various entities as to how the 

Framework is being used. Three years after its release, we have no objective data that reliably tells us if 

the existence of the Framework has actually changed behavior, if those changes have actually improved 

security, and critically if use of the Framework is cost effective. We look forward to working with the 

Committee to add this critical piece of the Framework, as called for in the Executive Order that created 

the Framework in 2013," Clinton said. "Companies will naturally use elements of the Framework that have 

been shown to be cost effective. Having data like this- even it is just from federal agencies- would be 

one of the best bulwarks we can have against creating a regulatory environment in cybersecurity." 

"While the bill does not address the need for a cost-benefit analysis of the Framework- which is 

something ISA will like to see in the near future -this bill is a positive step to creating a sustainable 

cybersecurity system,' said Clinton. "!SA applauds the House Science Committee's efforts to address the 

systemic issues within cyberspace." 

About /SA: The Internet Security Alliance (/SA) is a trade association with members from virtually evety critical industry sector. 

!SA's mission is to integrate advanced technology wfth economics and public policy to create a sustainable system of cybersecurity. 

/SA pursues three goals.· thought leadership, policy advocacy and promoting sound security practices. ISAfs "Cybersecurity Social 

Contracr' has been embraced as the model for government policy by both Republicans and Democrats. /SA also developed the 

Cyber Risk Handbook for the National Association of Corporate Directors. For more information about /SA, please visit 

www.isalliance.ora or 703~907-7090. 

### 

(39) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUP: H.R. 1430, HONEST AND 

OPEN NEW EPA SCIENCE TREATMENT 

ACT OF 2017 (HONEST ACT); 

AND H.R. 1431, EPA 

SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD 

REFORM ACT OF 2017 

THURSDAY, MARCH 9, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:37 a.m., in room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. 

Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recess at 

any time, and without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare 

recesses of the Committee at any time. 

Pursuant to Committee Rule II(e) and House Rule 112(2)(h)(4), 

the Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes. 

Today we meet to consider two bills. The first is H.R. 1430, the 

Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act of 2017, or the 

HONEST Act, and H.R. 1431, the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2017. I’ll recognize myself for an opening statement and 

then the Ranking Member. 

H.R. 1430 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 1430, 

the Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act for 2017, or 

the HONEST Act. The clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 1430, a bill to prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from proposing, finalizing or disseminating regulations or assessments—— 

Chairman SMITH. OK. And without objection, the bill is considered as read and open for amendment at any point, and I’ll continue with my opening statement. 

H.R. 1430 is a short, 4-page, commonsense bill that simply requires the Environmental Protection Agency to base its regulations 

on science that is publicly available, not secret. In the last Congress, a similar bill, the Secret Science Act, passed the House with 

bipartisan support. 
40 

Today’s legislation, which I introduced with Democratic Representative Henry Cuellar, ensures sound science is the basis for 

EPA decisions and regulatory actions. The days of trust-me science 

are over. In our modern information age, Federal regulations 

should be based only upon data that is available for every American to see and can be subjected to independent review. That’s the 

scientific method. 

We can all agree that the government should rely on the best 

available science. Unfortunately, the government does not always 

hold to this standard. Looking at the EPA’s past record, it is clear 

that the Agency has not followed an open and honest process. For 

example, nearly every major air quality regulation from the previous Administration was justified by studies using data that even 

the EPA had not seen. This means that the EPA’s claims about the 

costs and benefits of its regulations and the real risks they are 

meant to address cannot be independently evaluated by unbiased 

experts. If EPA’s mandates are really based on sound science, then 

show Americans the data. EPA’s refusal to cooperate leads to the 

question: What are they hiding? 

Perhaps the most burdensome Obama-era regulation is the Clean 

Power Plan. This rule mandates what types of energy we can and 

cannot use and would regulate all of the Nation’s electricity supply. 

The proposal would cost billions of dollars annually, kill thousands 

of jobs, and increase electricity costs for everyone, all while having 

a minimal benefit on the environment. 

In fact, the Clean Power Plan would only reduce global temperatures by three one-hundredths of a degree Celsius and reduce sealevel rise by the thickness of only three sheets of paper. How can 

these miniscule benefits be justified, particularly given the adverse 

impacts of the regulation? Again, the EPA should show Americans 

the data they claim justifies their regulations. 

We all care about the environment. We share a common goal to 

protect the lands we farm and the water we drink. But if policies 

aren’t based on legit science, stringent regulations and 

unachievable results in economic hardship with little or no environmental benefit. In other words, the regulations would be all pain 

and no gain. 

Instead of producing policies that protect the environment, it appears that the EPA is more concerned with pushing a political 

agenda. This is why outside independent review should be required. It’s impossible to conduct a policy debate without all the 

facts. 

The bill before us strengthens previous House-passed legislation 

in the 114th Congress, the Secret Science Reform Act. That bill also 

required the EPA to base its decisions on information available to 

scientists and the American public. This year’s legislation improves 

on the bill that passed in the last Congress. It adds provisions to 

better protect personally identifiable information and confidential 

business information as well. It also stipulates that this bill does 

not retroactively apply to past regulations, but instead focuses on 

new regulations. It stipulates that this bill does not retroactively 

apply to the past regulations. This allows the EPA to focus its limited resources on quality science that all researchers can examine. 
41 

This bill will promote sound science and restore confidence in the 

EPA decisionmaking process. This bill ensures that the EPA is not 

promoting a one-sided ideological agenda. The legislation provides 

an opportunity for the type of honest and accountable government 

that the American people want and deserve. 

So I urge my colleagues to support the HONEST Act. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

H.R. 1430, the Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act of 2017, or 

HONEST Act, is a short, four page, common-sense bill that simply requires the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to base its regulations on science that is publicly available, not secret. 

In the last Congress, a similar bill, the Secret Science Act, passed the House with 

bipartisan support. 

Today’s legislation, which I introduced with Democratic Representative Henry 

Cuellar, ensures sound science is the basis for EPA decisions and regulatory actions. 

The days of trust-me ‘‘science’’ are over. In our modern information age, federal 

regulations should be based only upon data that is available for every American to 

see and can be subjected to independent review. That’s the scientific method. 

We can all agree that the government should rely on the best available science. 

Unfortunately, the government does not always hold to this standard. 

Looking at the EPA’s past record, it is clear that the agency has not followed an 

open and honest process. For example, nearly every major air quality regulation 

from the previous administration was justified by studies using data that even the 

EPA hadn’t seen. 

This means that the EPA’s claims about the costs and benefits of its regulations 

and the real risks they are meant to address cannot be independently evaluated by 

unbiased experts. 

If EPA’s mandates are really based on sound science, then show Americans the 

data. EPA’s refusal to cooperate leads to the question: What are they hiding? 

Perhaps the most burdensome Obama era regulation is the Clean Power Plan. 

This rule mandates what types of energy we can and cannot use and would regulate 

all of the nation’s electricity supply. 

The proposal would cost billions of dollars annually, kill thousands of jobs, and 

increase electricity costs for everyone, all while having a minimal benefit on the environment. 

In fact, the Clean Power Plan would only reduce global temperatures by three 

onehundredths of a degree Celsius and reduce sea level rise by the thickness of only 

three sheets of paper. 

How can these miniscule benefits be justified, particularly given the adverse impacts of the regulation? Again, the EPA should show Americans the data they claim 

justifies their regulations. 

We all care about the environment. We share a common goal to protect the lands 

we farm and the water we drink. 

But if policies aren’t based on legit science, stringent regulations and 

unachievable standards will result in economic hardship with little or no environmental benefit. In other words, the regulations would be all pain and no gain. 

Instead of producing policies that protect the environment, it appears that the 

EPA is more concerned with pushing a political agenda. This is why outside independent review should be required. It’s impossible to conduct a policy debate without all the facts. 

The bill before us strengthens previous House-passed legislation in the 114th Congress, the Secret Science Reform Act. That bill also required the EPA to base its decisions on information available to scientists and the American public. 

This year’s legislation improves on the bill that passed in the last Congress. It 

adds provisions to better protect personally identifiable information and confidential 

business information. 

It also stipulates that this bill does not retroactively apply to past regulations, but 

instead focuses on new regulations. 

This allows the EPA to focus its limited resources on quality science that all researchers can examine. This bill will promote sound science and restore confidence 

in the EPA decision-making process. 

This bill ensures that the EPA is not promoting a one-sided ideological agenda. 

The legislation provides an opportunity for the type of honest and accountable government that the American people want and deserve. I urge my colleagues to support the HONEST Act. 
42 

Chairman SMITH. Before yielding to the Ranking Member, without objection, I’d like to add the following letters of support for 

H.R. 1430 into the record. They would be US Chamber of Commerce, Independent Petroleum Association of America, American 

Exploration and Production Council, Princeton and CO2 Coalition, 

Cato, National Association of Home Builders, the Small Business 

and Entrepreneurship Council. 

With that, I’ll yield to the Ranking Member, the gentlewoman 

from Texas, Eddie Bernice Johnson. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Today we will be revisiting two bills this Committee considered 

in the previous two Congresses: The Secret Science Reform Act, which is now renamed the HONEST Act, and the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act. As in those prior congresses, today I will 

be strongly opposing passage of each of these misguided pieces of 

legislation. 

At the outset, let me say that the cosmetic changes that were 

made to the Secret Science Reform Act in arriving at the HONEST 

Act do nothing to address the larger issues with this bill. Under the 

current legislation, the EPA would have to publicly distribute any 

scientific data relied upon for a covered action. EPA could withhold 

from public distribution items containing trade secrets or personal 

information. However, under this bill, anyone could then access 

this sensitive data after signing a confidentiality agreement with 

the EPA. Since the EPA is not authorized to issue confidentiality 

agreements for third-party researchers, this legislation would have 

the same effect as the Secret Science Reform Act: Limiting the ability of the EPA to use the best science. 

Since we have some new Members on the Science Committee, I 

think it might be instructive to remind folks how we got to today’s 

markup of the HONEST Act. Several years ago a tobacco industry 

consultant attempted to obtain access to the American Cancer Society’s epidemiology data. He was denied access to that data due to 

his extensive prior connections with the tobacco industry and prior 

misuse of American Cancer Society data. Then the Chairman came 

to his aid, by subpoenaing the EPA to provide the Committee with 

the data used in two seminal health studies conducted by Harvard 

and the American Cancer Society, not the EPA or the government. 

This data contained the personal health histories of tens of thousands of American citizens. Thankfully, since EPA did not possess 

this data, they were unable to provide it to the Committee. I say 

this because the Chairman had indicated his intent to publicly distribute these tens of thousands of people’s health histories over the 

internet—a horrifying prospect. 

However, that answer didn’t satisfy the Majority. The Majority’s 

solution to this manufactured problem was the Secret Science Reform Act. At the legislative hearing on this bill, the Majority invited three witnesses with extensive ties to the tobacco industry. 

And this would be a theme that would continue. The groups that 

endorsed the Majority’s bill are a who’s who of toxic chemical manufacturers. 

On the other hand, groups that opposed the bill included the 

American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Lung Association, the American Association for Justice, the 
43 

Union of Concerned Scientists, the Natural Resources Defense 

Council, and a host of other public health and environmental 

groups. The differences in those two groups underscores the real 

intent of this legislation: To undermine the science that EPA can 

use in their work, and ultimately, make it easier to pollute in our 

country. 

If this bill were enacted, EPA could be crippled, and the result 

would be more sick Americans and more dead Americans. 

Now, before I conclude, I’d like to say to Mr. Chairman and the 

Committee, I have several letters of opposition that I’d like to place 

in the record from the Union—— 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection. 
44 

~AGU_ American Geophysical Union 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

8 March 2017 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

2317 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson: 

On behalf of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) and its more than 60,000 members, I am 

writing to express concerns about the Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act of 

2017 (HONEST Act) and the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of2017. We encourage 

you and your colleagues to take additional time to evaluate the unintended consequences of these 

bills before the bills move forward. 

Although we appreciate the HONEST Act's protections for confidential information, we remain 

concerned about several provisions in the bill. For example, requirements in the bill for the use 

of"best available science," "data," and "reproducible" do not have uniform applications across 

all disciplines. 

With respect to reproducibility of research, some scientific research involves longitudinal studies 

that are so large and of great duration that they could not realistically be reproduced. The same 

may be true for scientific data from a one-time event (e.g., Deepwater Horizon Gulf oil spill) 

where the data is gathered in real time. We're concerned that in these situations the EPA could 

be constrained from using important or relevant research in making decisions. 

The legislation could also impose costs on recipients of federal research grants where the 

research results are expected to be "relied on to support a covered action." The bill is not clear on 

whether it is the EPA's or the research institution's responsibility to cover the costs associated 

with sharing and archiving this information. 

We are also troubled by the implications of the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act. As an 

organization that represents scientists from broad backgrounds and expertise, we appreciate the 

attempt to ensure a diverse panel of scientific knowledge and perspectives, and support the bill's 

goal of increasing accountability and transparency for scientific advisors. However, because the 

bill would exclude some scientists with substantial expertise in their fields from the Science 

Advisory Board (SAB), the SAB would suffer from the exclusion of valuable insight. The 

purpose of the SAB is to review the quality and robustness of scientific data that informs EPA's 

2000 Florida Avenue, NW. Washington, DC 20009·1277 

Tel: 202.462.6900 

Fax: +1 202.328.0566 

www.agu.org 
45 

regulatory process. It is imperative that the SAB comprise the most expert, independent scientists 

and technical advisors to best fulfill that mission. 

AGU looks forward to working with you on these critical issues in the future. 

With best wishes, 

Lexi 

1*~ Shultz 

Director of Public Affairs 

American Geophysical Union 
46 

Advocacy partner of Environmental Defense Fund 

March 8, 2017 

Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chairman 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson, 

Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

394 Ford House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Environmental Defense Action Fund strongly opposes the "Honest and Open New EPA Science 

Treatment (HONEST) Act of 20 I 7" and the "EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 20 17". 

Despite their benign-sounding titles, these bills would have devastating effects on public health and the 

Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) ability to consider and use sound science. 

The HONEST Act, a rebranded version of the "Secret Science Reform Act" from prior sessions of 

Congress, is framed as a measure to increase transparency by requiring that EPA only use studies that are 

publicly available online and replicable. Yet, as testimony before your Committee has made clear, these 

requirements would in many cases prevent the EPA from using the best available science for public health 

decision-making. 

Many epidemiological studies - for example a study on the causes of breast cancer -rely on health data 

that are legally confidential. This legislation suggests that EPA will be given the authority to disclose 

confidential medical information on breast cancer patients to anyone willing to sign a confidentiality 

agreement. EPA would also be responsible for identifying and redacting any information that should not 

be made broadly publicly available in the frrst place. Not only is this not an appropriate role for EPA, it 

could severely restrict both the number of studies EPA can use and the willingness of participants to be 

part of vital health studies. 

In addition, the Act's requirements for replicability mean that critical longitudinal studies that follow 

health outcomes of individuals or groups over years, even decades, could not be used because-

( I) they are inherently not replicable (e.g., a study that follow health outcomes of frrst responders 

following a single event such as the tragic 9/11 attack); or 

(2) where they are replicable, it would take years to show that the results could be reproduced (e.g., a 

study that examines the impacts on intelligence at childhood from environmental exposures that 

occurred in utero). 

Furthermore, even if, say, a longitudinal study that follows a cohort of individuals over 20 years could in 

principle be reproduced, there are practical and ethical reasons why it couldn't or shouldn't be. The same 

goes for a long-term environmental monitoring study, or data collected from a one-time event like the 

Deepwater Horizon Spill. 
47 

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has found1 that previous iterations of this legislation would 

impede the number of studies the EPA can rely on-by their estimate, reducing the number of studies by 

half. Restricting EPA to just some of the existing scientific literature will prevent the agency from using 

the latest and most accurate science when developing regulations. Moreover, the tremendous resource 

burden of making data publicly available (CBO's central estimate was $250 million a year) would create 

a strong incentive to reduce the amount of scientific data and analysis considered as part of decisionmaking. The net effect would be to undermine EPA's ability to rely on the best available science and 

unnecessarily put the public at greater environmental and health risk. 

Similarly, the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2017 undermines scientific integrity of the 

EPA. Contrary to longstanding practice, the bill allows individuals with fmancial conflicts of interest to 

serve on the EPA Science Advisory Board (SAB) so long as those conflicts are disclosed. This would 

permit an infusion of special corporate interest into what should remain an objective scientific review of 

EPA work products. 

Incredibly, at the same time, the bill makes it more difficult for academic experts to participate on the 

SAB. The bill considers an expert's research on a topic covered by the Board to be a conflict of interest, 

when in fact the academic's expertise would make them more, not less, valuable. In addition, receipt of 

EPA research grants and contracts, standard for universities, would be construed to constitute a conflict of 

interest for a scientist or expert. And a SAB member would be precluded from accepting any such grant 

or contract for three years after serving on the board which may deter qualified experts from serving on 

the SAB. 

The "Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment (HONEST) Act of 2017" and the "EPA Science 

Advisory Board Reform Act of 20 17" would block the use of sound science by EPA in developing public 

safeguards. For these reasons, EDF Action strongly opposes these bills. 

Sincerely, 

Elizabeth B. Thompson, President 

Environmental Defense Action Fund 

'httw //www.cbo gov/sites/default/files/114lb-congress-20lS-20!6/costestimate/bn03o.pdf 
48 

March 8, 2017 

Dear Representative: 

AMERICAN 

LUNG 

ASSOCIATION. 

The undersigned health and medical organizations are writing to express our opposition to the EPA 

Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2017 and the Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act of 

2017. Our organizations are dedicated to saving lives and improving public health. 

Science is the bedrock of sound medical and public health decision-making. The best science undergirds 

everything our organizations do to improve health. Under the Clean Air Act, EPA has long implemented a 

transparent and open process for seeking advice from the medical and scientific community on 

standards and measures to meet those standards. Both of these bills would restrict the input of 

scientific experts in the review of complex issues and add undue industry influence into EPA's decisionmaking process. 

As written, the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act would make unneeded and unproductive 

changes that would: 

Restrict the ability of scientists to speak on issues that include their own expertise; 

Block scientists who receive any EPA grants from serving on the EPA Scientific Advisory Board, 

despite their having the expertise and conducted relevant research that earned them these 

highly competitive grants; 

Prevent the EPA Scientific Advisory Board from making policy recommendations, even though 

EPA administrators have regularly sought their advice in the past; 

Add a notice and comment component to all parts of the EPA Scientific Advisory Board actions, a 

burdensome and unnecessary requirement since their reviews of major issues already include 

public notice and comment; and 

Reallocate membership requirements to increase the influence of industry representatives on 

the scientific advisory panels. 

In short, EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act would limit the voice of scientists, restrict the ability of 

the Board to respond to important questions, and increase the influence of industry in shaping EPA 

policy. This is not in the best interest of the American public. 

We also have concerns with the HONEST Act. This legislation would limit the kinds of scientific data EPA 

can use as it develops policy to protect the American public from environmental exposures and permit 

violation of patient confidentiality. If enacted, the legislation would: 

Allow the EPA administrator to release confidential patient information to third parties, 

including industry; 

Bolster industry's flawed arguments to discredit research that documents the adverse health 

effects of environmental pollution; and 
49 

Impose new standards for the publication and distribution of scientific research that go beyond 

the robust, existing requirements of many scientific journals. 

Science, developed by the respected men and women scientists at colleges and universities across the 

United States, has always been the foundation of the nation's environmental policy. EPA's science-based 

decision-making process has saved lives and led to dramatic improvements in the quality of the air we 

breathe, the water we drink and the earth we share. All Americans have benefited from the researchbased scientific advice that scientists have provided to EPA. 

Congress should adopt policy that fortifies our scientists, not bills that undermine the scientific integrity 

of EPA's decision-making or give polluters a disproportionate voice in EPA's policy-setting process. 

We strongly urge you to oppose these bills. 

Sincerely, 

Harold P. Wimmer 

National President and CEO 

American Lung Association 

Stephen C. Crane, PhD, MPH 

Executive Director 

American Thoracic Society 
50 

[ c~cebtedscientists 

March 09, 2017 

ucsusa.org Two Brattle Square, Cambridge, MA 02138-3780 t 617.547.5552 {617.864.9405 

1825 K StreetNW, Suite 800, Washington, DC 20006-12.32 t 202.22.3.6133 f 202.223.6162 

2397 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 20.3, Berkeley, CA 94704-1567 t 510.843.1872 f 510.843.3785 

One North LaSalle Street, Suite 1904, Chicago, IL 60602-4064 t .312.578.1750 f312.578.17Sl 

Dear Representative: 

The Union of Concerned Scientists, with 500,000 members and supporters 

throughout the country, strongly opposes H.R. 1430, the misleadingly named Honest 

and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act (HONEST Act) of2017. The proposal 

shows that supporters of this legislation have a fundamental misunderstanding of the 

process by which science operates and is ultimately a solution in search of a problem. 

This legislation would require that all raw data, models, code, and other materials 

from scientific studies be made available to the public before a federal agency could 

use it. But, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) already is exhaustingly 

transparent and the science it relies on to make decisions is made available to the 

public. 

The true intention of this bill is not to increase transparency in agency use of science 

in policymaking, but rather to handcuff the EPA from ever using critical infonnation 

necessary to follow through on statutorily required rulemaking for popular legislation 

like the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. The additional restrictions imposed 

by this proposed bill would make it almost impossible to base public protections on 

the best available scientific infonnation. In particular, if enacted, the language 

appears to indicate that the EPA would be inhibited by the following challenges: 

• The EPA wouldn't be able to use most health studies. It should be 

expected that any agency tasked with protecting public health should be able 

to use public health data. The confidentiality of such data is usually protected 

by institutional review boards (IRB) to insure the privacy of the participants; 

thus, the data could not be made publicly available as demanded. Since many 

EPA rules are health-based standards, this rule would severely restrict the 

ability of the agency to base rules on science. 

• The EPA wouldn't be able to draw from industry data sources. The 

agency would be prevented from using data provided by industry to the 

agency. Since infonnation from industry sources is often not publicly 

available, to protect proprietary data from their competitors, a law requiring as 

such would prevent the agency from utilizing industry data, a source of 

infonnation that often provides otherwise unknown data to infonn EPA rulemaking. 

Printed on 100% post-COIUllmer recycled paper 
51 

The EPA wouldn't be able to use new and innovative science. New 

scientific methods and data may be restricted by intellectual property 

protections or industry trade secret exemptions. This bill doesn't include 

protections for intellectual property, and it makes industry trade secrets 

available upon request to anyone who signs an agreement. If researchers and 

industry knew that sharing their science with the EPA meant that their 

intellectual property would be exposed to the world, they might opt out. This 

would limit EPA's ability to rely on the best available science including novel 

approaches that may not yet be publicly available. 

Long-term and meta- analyses would be unavailable. Many of the public 

health and safety issues facing the nation cannot be measured within a small 

timeframe. The EPA needs long-term exposure studies that assess the link 

between chronic diseases/mortality and pollutants; or on meta- analyses that 

include many different studies and locations to provide a more robust look at 

the science. In H.R. 1430, the provision that studies be conducted "in a 

manner that is sufficient for independent analysis and substantial reproduction 

of research" may prevent use of these vital studies by the EPA, as it is unclear 

whether such spatially and temporally comprehensive studies would be 

considered "sufficient for substantial reproduction." 

The CBO estimates exorbitant costs. The attempt to implement this law 

would also make the EPA process much more costly. For past iterations of 

this legislation, the CBO has estimated1 it may take up to $250 million 

annually for the EPA simply to comply, and that doesn't even account for the 

lost benefits from delaying the protections themselves. Compounded with the 

cuts to EPA's budget that are being proposed, this would just further prevent 

the agency from being able to do its job. 

H.R. 1430 makes a token attempt to address some of the criticisms about privacy 

concerns for personal medical information and trade secrets. But in practice, the 

challenge of identifying and redacting all protected and privileged information sets up 

a series of hurdles and complications that will deter agencies from using the best 

scientific analysis to inform their work. 

Small, cosmetic tweaks do not change the fact that this bill is based on a flawed 

premise and that the authors of the legislation do not understand the scientific 

process. Furthermore, the burden imposed on the EPA to redact documents would 

ultimately place limits on the amount of actual scientific work the EPA can do. The 

EPA does not exist in a world of infinite resources. 

1 https:Uwww.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress-2015-

2016/costestimate/hr1030.pdf 
52 

When this bill was introduced in the !14th Congress as the "Secret Science Reform 

Act," it received a veto threat2 from the Obama administration, which noted that it 

would "interfere" with the EPA's ability to protect public health, safety, and the 

environment. The worry is that now, with an administration that has shown zero 

interest in using science to enact safeguards, this legislation could cripple the agency. 

I strongly urge you to oppose H.R. 1430, the so-called HONEST Act. The only 

honest thing about this legislation is that it truly opens the window into the real 

intentions of the supporters of the bill, and that is to stop the EPA from fulfilling its 

science-based mission to protect public health and the environment. H.R. 1430 is a 

wolf in sheep's clothing, purporting to increase public accessibility to data used in 

rule making, while actually crippling the EPA's ability to use the best available 

scientific and technical information to protect public health and the environment. 

Agencies protecting our public health should be able to use public health data and 

attempts to undermine agencies shouldn't be cloaked in false transparency. This 

Trojan-horse transparency bill would inhibit the EPA's ability to carry out its sciencebased mission to protect human health and the environment. It does not deserve your 

support. 

Sincerely, 

Director, Center for Science and Democracy 

Union of Concerned Scientists 

1

https:Uobamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/legislative/sap/114 

/saphr1030r 20150303.pdf 
53 

[CUDionof edS • . onceru ctentists 

March 09,2017 

ucsusa.org Two Brattle Square, Cambridge, MA 02138-3780 t 617.547.5552 £617.864.9405 

1825 K Street NW, Suite 800, Washington, DC 20006Ml232 t 202.223.6133 f 202.223.6162 

2397 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 203, Berkeley, CA 94704--1567 t 510.843.1872 £510.84-3.3785 

One North LaSalle Street, Suite 1904, Chicago, IL 60602K4064 t 312.578.1750 fJ12.578.1751 

Dear Representative: 

The Union of Concerned Scientists strongly opposes H.R.l431, the EPA Science 

Advisory Board Reform Act of2017. The independence of the Environmental 

Protection Agency's (EPA) Science Advisory Board (SAB) and its ability to continue 

its work with the caliber of experts it currently employs would be seriously 

jeopardized if this proposal were to become law. 

This proposal would make it nearly impossible for the SAB to do the crucial 

independent evaluations of EPA scientific analyses that enable the agency to protect 

public health and the environment. This bill opens the door for more corporate 

influence on the Board, because the bill explicitly stipulates that experts with 

fmancial ties to corporations affected by SAB assessments are "not excluded." This 

signal likely will increase the number of conflicted SAB members and stack the panel 

with appointees who may directly benefit from the panel's activity. At a time when 

the ability of corporations to influence policy has significantly increased under this 

administration, It strikes at the heart of the whole concept of independent review. 

While the legislation encourages experts with regulated industry ties to join the SAB, 

it also establishes significant roadblocks for academic experts to meaningfully 

participate by harming experts' participation in "advisory activities that directly or 

indirectly involve review and evaluation of their own work." This effectively turns 

the idea of conflict of interest on its head, with the bizarre presumption that corporate 

experts with direct financial interests are not conflicted while academics who work on 

these issues are. The notion that a member of the SAB cannot fully participate in a 

discussion that touches upon the member's own work is counterproductive and goes 

far beyond common-sense limits. 

While SAB experts with published, peer-reviewed research should be able to address 

topics on which they have credentials, the language in the bill is vague and raises 

many questions. Generally, experts have developed their knowledge base over time, 

and not purely through peer-reviewed publications. How is an academic scientist 

supposed to make that distinction? What happens if a scientist relies on expertise that 

is not specifically permitted in the bill? Will there be legal ramifications? Clearly, 

scientific experts will think twice before joining the SAB if it means they will have to 

consult their lawyers before they give their advice to the EPA administrator. 

Printed on 100% post~ consumer recycled paper 
54 

The bill slightly differs from previous versions because it now includes a provision 

that board members may not have current contracts with the EPA or "shall not apply 

for a grant or contract for 3 years following the end of that member's service on the 

Board." This is a senseless provision in the bill. EPA awards grants to academic 

scientists to learn more about scientific topics without a policy agenda and grantees 

are free to conduct the science and produce results any way they want, free from 

political or undue influence. There is no predetermined or desired outcome and the 

grant process is a completely separate from EPA policy actions. Conflating the 

SAB 's activity with EPA grants is to completely misunderstand how the awarding of 

research grants work at the agency. 

Another new provision to H.R. 1431 would discourage members of the public to 

provide feedback to the SAB by limiting the number of similar comments that could 

be considered in the record. This directly impacts members of the public who sign 

their name to comments initiated by nonprofit organizations with a strong grassroots 

presence. If the thousands of comments submitted on a certain issue are only 

considered as one, the voices of all of those individuals would be effectively silenced. 

It is as much anti-democratic as it is anti-science and effectively diminishes the voice 

of communities most often bearing the brunt of environmental or health impacts that 

the SAB is charged with analyzing. 

There are a number of other concerns with the bill, including limitless comment 

periods that could be initiated by members of the public who do not believe in the 

EPA's mission. This could cripple the ability of the SAB and the EPA to address 

some of the most pressing and complex scientific challenges of the day. 

Proponents of the legislation might argue that the EPA SAB is 'stacked' with 

scientists, and that should not be an argument in favor of the bill. It is the role of the 

SAB to have the necessary issue experts to protect public health and safety and help 

fulfill the EPA's science-based mission. This bill would not improve the work of the 

Board, and would make it more difficult for the EPA to receive the independent 

science advice it needs to do its work. We strongly urge your opposition to H.R. 

1431. 

Sincerely, 

Director, Center for Science and Democracy 

Union of Concerned Scientists 
55 

Ms. JOHNSON [continuing]. Of Concerned Scientists, the Environmental Defense Fund, the American Geophysical Union, the American Thoracic Society, and the American Lung Association all opposing these bills and all who recognize the danger these bills pose 

to the private health information of Americans. Trade secrets of industries, and the ability of the Environmental Protection Agency to 

protect the public health and environment. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you Chairman Smith. Today we will be revisiting two bills this committee 

considered in the previous two congresses: The Secret Science Reform Act, which is 

now renamed the HONEST Act, and the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act. 

As in those prior congresses, today I will be strongly opposing passage of each of 

these misguided pieces of legislation. 

At the outset, let me say that the cosmetic changes that were made to the Secret 

Science Reform Act in arriving at the HONEST Act do nothing to address the larger 

issues with this bill. Under the current legislation, the EPA would have to publicly 

distribute any scientific data relied upon for a covered action. EPA could withhold 

from public distribution items containing trade secrets or personal information. 

However, under this bill anyone could then access this sensitive data after signing 

a confidentiality agreement with the EPA. Since the EPA is not authorized to issue 

confidentiality agreements for third party researchers, this legislation would have 

the same effect as the Secret Science Reform Act: Limiting the ability of the EPA 

to use the best science. 

Since we have some new Members on the Science Committee, I think it might be 

instructive to remind folks how we got to today’s markup of the HONEST Act. Several years ago a tobacco industry consultant attempted to obtain access to the American Cancer Society’s epidemiology data. He was denied access to that data due to 

his extensive prior connections with the tobacco industry and prior misuse of American Cancer Society data. Then the Chairman came to his aid, by subpoenaing the 

EPA to provide the Committee with the data used in two seminal health studies 

conducted by Harvard and the American Cancer Society. This data contained the 

personal health histories of tens of thousands of American citizens. Thankfully, 

since EPA did not possess this data, they were unable to provide it to the Committee. I say this because the Chairman had indicated his intent to publicly distribute these tens of thousands of people’s health histories over the internet - a horrifying prospect. 

However, that answer didn’t satisfy the Majority. The Majority’s solution to this 

manufactured problem was the Secret Science Reform Act. At the legislative hearing 

on this bill, the Majority invited three witnesses with extensive ties to the tobacco 

industry. And this would be a theme that would continue. The groups that endorsed 

the Majority’s bill are a ‘‘who’s who’’ of toxic chemical manufacturers. On the other 

hand, groups that opposed the bill included the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Lung Association, the American Association for 

Justice, the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Natural Resources Defense Council, 

and a host of other public health and environmental groups. 

The differences in those two groups underscores the real intent of this legislation: 

To undermine the science that EPA can use in their work, and ultimately, make 

it easier to pollute in our country. If this bill were enacted, EPA could be crippled, 

and the result would be more sick Americans and more dead Americans. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

Are there any amendments to this bill, or does the gentlewoman 

from Oregon wish to be recognized, and if so—— 

Ms. BONAMICI. Yes. I move to strike the last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

When I’m home in Oregon and talk about serving on the Science 

Committee, a committee with tremendous potential, my constituents ask me what are we doing to promote more research and investment in technology that will drive down the cost of renewable 
56 

energy and reduce our country’s dependence on fossil fuels. They 

wonder what we’re doing to protect our coastline from ocean acidification and threats of tsunami. They want the local Superfund site 

cleaned up, and they don’t want cuts to the EPA budget. They 

aren’t asking us to spend time challenging the data behind the research that supports important regulations that help keep our air 

and water clean, and they certainly aren’t asking this Committee 

to spend time putting more industry representatives and fewer scientists on the EPA’s Science Advisory Boards. 

Yet we’re here today considering these bills when there’s so 

many other things and more meaningful policies we should be discussing. Congress, especially the Science Committee, has a responsibility to act to preserve our planet’s health and stabilize the 

threats to our environment and our economy, threats that are serious and detrimental to the planet if we do nothing. Climate change 

is real and it’s advancing. We had a very warm February. Global 

sea levels are rising, ice sheets are melting and shrinking at alarming rates. The health of our oceans is at risk. The acidity of our 

surface ocean waters is rapidly increasing, and the upper layers of 

the ocean are absorbing about 2 billion tons of carbon dioxide every 

year. 

Unfortunately, the new Environmental Protection Agency Administrator appears to have little appreciation for the role of the 

Agency in protecting the environment. In his first days at the EPA, 

Administrator Pruitt has started the process of rolling back protections for our water, our streams, and walking away from collecting 

data on methane emissions. According to a recent New York Times 

article, he is filling the Agency with climate change skeptics and 

deniers, and as former Administrator Gina McCarthy remarked, 

‘‘Here for the first time I see someone who has no commitment to 

the mission of the Agency.’’ 

By considering the bills before us today, this Committee is ignoring our responsibility to protect the environment. The completely 

unnecessary so-called HONEST Act will undermine Americans’ privacy rights by allowing personally identifiable information to be 

public at the Administrator’s discretion, and the EPA Science Advisory Board will not further the Agency’s mission of protecting 

human health and the environment. The bill aims to pack the 

Science Advisory Board with industry representatives while leaving 

out knowledgeable scientists who actually do EPA-funded research. 

Now, I’m proud to have worked with so many of you across the 

aisle during my years on this Committee. I ask that we take a step 

back to reflect on the mission of the EPA and think about how we 

can work together to make our environment and our economy 

thrive for future generations. Let’s reject these partisan bills today 

and find some commonsense policies we can agree on that will 

move our country forward. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici. 

And the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Beyer, is recognized for 5 

minutes. 

Mr. BEYER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the last 

word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 
57 

Mr. BEYER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman, I have a number of objections to this proposal 

which I’ll briefly share now and then submit my extended remarks 

for the record later. 

First, while the ability to reproduce work is crucial to the scientific process, we should not focus so heavily or exclusively on reproducibility. Not all work that’s reproducible is right, and just because it is not reproducible does not make it wrong. Funding agencies, scientific journals, and the EPA have worked on their own 

over the last few years to enact policies and best practices that encourage a more open process that can be easily reproduced. 

But we need to think of some of the most catastrophic public 

health threats that have occurred over the last 35 years or so, 

events we need to study but could not possibly reproduce: Ash 

clouds and dust caused by Mt. St. Helens eruption in 1980, extensive flooding and damage caused by Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the 

massive Gulf oil spill resulting from Deepwater Horizon explosions 

in 2010, the fires, fumes and dust in New York caused by the collapse of the Twin Towers on 9/11, the Aliso Canyon gas leak in 

2015, or even the oft-studied, oft-hearing Gold King Mine spill in 

2015. How could we possibly reproduce these large and unpredictable events in exactly the same way? We can’t, but does this mean 

we should no longer study the impact of these nationally important 

events? I hope not because the American people need answers because their health depends on it. 

Second, many of my Federal employee constituents and I take offense at the title of this legislation, the HONEST Act, which seems 

to somehow imply that EPA employees and EPA scientists are 

somehow not being honest. So I want to take this opportunity to 

tell the hardworking, dedicated employees of the EPA and civil 

servants governmentwide that many in Congress recognize the significant work you do. Many in this body despite what’s implied by 

the title of this Act hold your work in high regard, and we appreciate the substantial contributions you’ve made in furtherance of 

clean air, clean water and public health, and I hope that my Republican colleagues will soon come to realize and appreciate the 

vital mission of the EPA and hope they’ll stop tarnishing the work 

and attacking the reputations of the dedicated civil servants who 

work to advance its mission and the health of all Americans. 

I yield back, Mr. Chair. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Beyer. 

The gentleman from California, Mr. McNerney, is recognized. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

What we’re considering today is basically the Secret Science Reform Act with a new name. The bill before us today, the Honest 

and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act, is an attack on the 

EPA. The bill is an attempt to undermine the Clean Air Act and 

the progress the law has made in improving public and environmental health. 

A scientist collects data for his or her research, and in order for 

it to be published, it must go through peer review, which the EPA 

then uses in developing science-based rules. The EPA identifies 

peer-reviewed articles in the Federal Register. The process for rulemaking is currently transparent and thorough. This bill would add 
58 

unneeded duplication and expense to the process. It’s also unclear 

how this legislation would improve our ability to enact oversight 

and protections for environment and public health. 

If we want to encourage businesses to develop new, innovative 

technologies and for our science community to be able to work 

without fear of retribution for their work, we must protect confidential business information. This bill has no protections for confidential business information. Without safeguards for confidential 

business information, businesses have no incentive whatsoever to 

share their information with the Federal Government and our scientists will not have the best available science for their work or to 

protect public health and protect the environment from harm. 

This legislation illustrates a basic lack of understanding about 

how science and industry is conducted and will harm our ability to 

execute quality science. This legislation has no redeeming qualities, 

and I urge its opposition. 

With that, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. McNerney. 

Let me just recognize myself for a minute, and I am going to be 

able to point to language in the bill that might address some of the 

concerns that have been raised here today about the exposure of 

confidential information that happens to be one of the changes we 

made in the bill from last year to this bill is to protect that private 

information, and I’ll be giving you that language momentarily. If 

you all will take a look at page 2 of the bill, lines 18 to 22, the 

redacted information described in paragraph 1C shall be disclosed 

to a person only after such person signs a written confidentiality 

agreement with the Administrator subject to guidance to be developed by the Administrator. So I really think we’ve addressed, as I 

say, some of the concerns that have been raised. 

If there are no amendments—— 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter, 

is recognized. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I move to strike the last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. And I appreciate the Chairman and that 

amendment. We’ve seen this bill before. That amendment helped 

what we had last year, which was the Secret Science bill, but that 

was a lousy bill then and this is still a lousy bill now, even with 

the amendment that the Chairman has made to the bill. And, you 

know, the moniker, the name of this bill, the HONEST Act, really 

should be the Dishonest Act because it dishonestly describes what’s 

going on in the Environmental Protection Agency that’s looking to 

try to protect our environment from extreme weather events that 

we have in Colorado, you have on the Coast, you have all over the 

country and all over the world. And for this Committee to continue 

to, you know, put its head in the sand and ignore what’s going on 

every day is really a problem and needs to be corrected, and the 

HONEST Act doesn’t do that. 

But I do want to thank the Chairman for—you know, we’ve had 

opportunity to have hearings on this bill, unlike what’s going on in 

the Energy and Commerce Committee and the Ways and Means 

Committee where the entire Affordable Care Act is being repealed 
59 

without a single hearing, without a single witness, without a single 

discussion in the middle of the night, and it’s that kind of hypocrisy 

that comes when a number of years ago there was objection to the 

Affordable Care Act saying there wasn’t enough time to study it 

when in fact there were 79 hearings and hundreds of witnesses and 

hundreds and hundreds of hours of testimony. To try to ram that 

through at this point is a real mistake and is in contrast to actually having some regular order that we have in this Committee 

from time to time. 

So I applaud the regular order that the Chairman conducts but 

I still disagree that this bill does anything to help the environment 

or to assist the EPA in its mission of trying to keep people healthy 

and keep the environment healthy. 

And so with that, I urge a no vote on this bill, and I yield back 

to the Chair. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Perlmutter. We appreciate the 

compliment directed toward the Committee. 

The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Posey, is recognized. 

Mr. POSEY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I just want to thank you for bringing this bill forward. I want 

to thank you for the transparent process that you allowed it to go 

through. This clearly is just a matter of transparency and government accountability. I don’t have a single—well, I can’t really say 

that, I have a few nuts—but most of my constituents want government to be more transparent and they want it to be more accountable, and you know, I’m just shocked there’s so many people that 

are afraid of transparency and accountability, and I thank you for 

bringing forward this bill that makes it more transparent and more 

accountable. The citizens deserve it. And I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Posey. 

If there are no amendments, a reporting quorum being present, 

I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 1430 to the House with the recommendation that the bill 

be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 1430 to the House. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman—— 

Chairman SMITH. A roll call vote has been requested by the 

Ranking Member, and the clerk will call the roll. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith? 

Chairman SMITH. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith votes aye. 

Mr. Lucas? 

Mr. LUCAS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lucas votes aye. 

Mr. Rohrabacher? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Brooks? 

Mr. BROOKS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Brooks votes aye. 

Mr. Hultgren? 

Mr. HULTGREN. Aye. 
60 

The CLERK. Mr. Hultgren votes aye. 

Mr. Posey? 

Mr. POSEY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Posey votes aye. 

Mr. Massie? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Bridenstine? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber? 

Mr. WEBER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber votes aye. 

Mr. Knight? 

Mr. KNIGHT. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Knight votes aye. 

Mr. Babin? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mrs. Comstock? 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Comstock votes aye. 

Mr. Palmer? 

Mr. PALMER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Palmer votes aye. 

Mr. Loudermilk? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Abraham? 

Mr. ABRAHAM. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Abraham votes aye. 

Mr. LaHood? 

Mr. LAHOOD. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. LaHood votes aye. 

Mr. Webster? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Banks? 

Mr. BANKS. Yes. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Banks votes aye. 

Mr. Biggs? 

Mr. BIGGS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Biggs votes aye. 

Mr. Marshall? 

Mr. MARSHALL. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Marshall votes aye. 

Mr. Dunn? 

Mr. DUNN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Dunn votes aye. 

Mr. Higgins? 

Mr. HIGGINS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Higgins votes aye. 

Ms. Johnson? 

Ms. JOHNSON. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson votes nay. 

Ms. Lofgren? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Lipinski? 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Nay. 
61 

The CLERK. Mr. Lipinski votes nay. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

Ms. BONAMICI. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Bonamici votes nay. 

Mr. Bera? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Ms. Esty? 

Ms. ESTY. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Esty votes nay. 

Mr. Veasey? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Beyer? 

Mr. BEYER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Beyer votes nay. 

Ms. Rosen? 

Ms. ROSEN. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Rosen votes nay. 

Mr. McNerney? 

Mr. MCNERNEY. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. McNerney votes nay. 

Mr. Perlmutter? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Perlmutter votes nay. 

Mr. Tonko? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Foster? 

Mr. FOSTER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Foster votes nay. 

Mr. Takano? 

Mr. TAKANO. Nay. 

The CLERK. Mr. Takano votes nay. 

Ms. Hanabusa? 

Ms. HANABUSA. Nay. 

The CLERK. Ms. Hanabusa votes nay. 

Mr. Crist? 

Mr. CRIST. Nay. 

The CLERK. Mr. Crist votes nay. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman from Kentucky. The gentleman 

is not recorded yet. 

Mr. MASSIE. Yes? 

Chairman SMITH. That is the correct vote. Thank you. 

The CLERK. Mr. Massie votes aye. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will continue to report. 

The CLERK. Mr. Chairman, 17 Members vote aye; 12 Members 

vote nay. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. The ayes have it, and the bill is reported 

favorably. 
62 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY- 1151

h Congress Full Committee Roll Gall 

Working Quorum: 13 Reporting Quorum: 20 

DATE: 3/9/17 

Bill: H.R. 1430 Final Passage 

MEMBER AYE NO PRESENT NOT VOTING 

1 Mr. SMITH, Chair- TX X 

2 Mr. LUCAS - OK ** X 

3 Mr. ROHRABACHER- CA 

4 Mr. BROOKS - AL X 

5 Mr. HULTGREN -IL X 

6 Mr. POSEY- FL X 

7 Mr. MASSIE- KY X 

8 Mr. BRIDENSTINE - OK 

9 Mr. WEBER- TX X 

10 Mr. KNIGHT - CA X 

11 Mr. BABIN - TX 

12 Mrs. COMSTOCK- VA X 

13 Mr. PALMER- AL X 

14 Mr. LOUDERMILK- GA 

15 Mr. ABRAHAM- LA X 

16 Mr. LAHOOD - IL X 

17 Mr. WEBSTER- FL 

18 Mr. BANKS -IN X 

19 Mr. BIGGS - AZ X 

20 Mr. MARSHALL - KS X 

21 Mr. DUNN-FL X 

22 Mr. HIGGINS- LA X 

1 Ms. JOHNSON, Ranking - TX X 

2 Ms. LOFGREN -CA 

3 Mr. LIPINSKI IL X 

4 Ms. BONAMICI- OR X 

5 Mr.BERA-CA 

6 Ms.ESTY-CT X 

7 Mr. VEASEY- TX 

8 Mr. BEYER- VA X 

9 Ms. ROSEN- NV X 

10 Mr. MCNERNEY- CA X 

11 Mr. PERLMUTTER- CO X 

12 Mr. TONKO- NY 

13 Mr. FOSTER- IL X 

14 Mr. TAKANO CA X 

15 Ms. HANABUSA- HI X 

16 Mr. CRIST FL X 

17 VACANT 

TOTALS 17 12 

•• Vice Chair 
63 

Without objection, the Motion to Reconsider is laid upon the 

table. H.R. 1430 is ordered reported to the House, and I ask unanimous consent that staff authorized to make any necessary technical 

and conforming changes, and without objection, so ordered. 

Before we go to the next bill, I just was going to say to the Members of the Committee that we have in our audience today a high 

school class—seniors—from Burke, Virginia, and I want to say to 

the seniors from Burke, Virginia, that you are going to hear some 

strong language today when we talk about these bills. We don’t 

take it personally, or we try not to. People do have legitimate differences of opinion. Bills are not always bipartisan although I will 

say on behalf of this Committee that of the 23 bills enacted last 

year that were produced by this Committee, 17 of the 23 were bipartisan. But today’s bills do not enjoy that particular rank but I 

just want the students to know this is all part of our general debate and we understand it, we accept it, and we’re still friends. 

H.R. 1431 

Chairman SMITH. And so we will now go to the next bill, and 

pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 1431, the EPA Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2017, and the clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 1431, a bill to amend the Environmental Research Development and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1978 

to provide for a Science Advisory Board—— 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. And I’ll now recognize 

the sponsor of the bill, the Vice Chairman of the Science Committee, Mr. Lucas, for an opening statement. 

Mr. LUCAS. Thank you, Chairman Smith, for bringing this important legislation to a markup. H.R. 1431, the Science Advisory 

Board Reform Act, ensures that the most qualified and capable scientists are free to undertake a balanced and open review of regulatory science. 

The Science Advisory Board was created in 1978 to provide independent expert advice on scientific and technical information. This 

information is used to justify important policy decisions and should 

be held to a high standard. 

In the subsequent decades and years, there have been serious deficiencies with the SAB and the process to select Board Members. 

Among other issues, there has been limited public participation, 

EPA interference with expert advice, and potential conflicts of interest. If the EPA undermines the Board’s independence or prevents it from providing candid advice to Congress, then the SAB 

serves no value to the EPA. The Board should be free to function 

as intended to ensure that sound science is driving policy decisions. 

We must reaffirm the Board’s independence so that the public can 

be confident that policy decisions are not hijacked by a predetermined political agenda. It’s time to update the law to restore scientific integrity to the process and independence to the Board. 

In the previous Congress, a substantially similar bill passed the 

House with bipartisan support. This time around, we worked to revise this bill to ensure the best advisory process for the SAB. The 

Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2017 addresses SAB shortcomings and deficiencies by guaranteeing a well-balanced expert 
64 

panel, increasing transparency, and encouraging public participation. This employs—this empowers the experts to provide meaningful and unbiased scientific advice. 

This Act also addresses the need for Board membership from 

State, local and tribal governments. Currently on the chartered 

SAB, there are only two members representing States. The fact 

that States like my home State of Oklahoma have no Board members, even though we play a prominent role in the agriculture and 

energy industries, both of which are heavily regulated by the EPA, 

is troubling. 

Furthermore, this bill prevents current SAB members from holding EPA contracts or grants as well as from receiving those funds 

within 3 years following the end of that member’s service on the 

Board. 

The bill also ensures that uncertainties in scientific conclusions 

are clearly communicated and allows the expert panel to focus on 

the science, rather than partisan policy debates. 

The language also codifies a requirement of the Board to respond 

to dissenting scientific views, and for comments to be published in 

the Federal Register. For ease of public access, these comments will 

be grouped by common theme and will not include reprinting of 

repetitious comments. 

This legislation recognizes the important role science should play 

to inform policy debates. The safeguards provided in this bill will 

ensure public confidence by requiring the use of sound science 

when informing regulatory decisions. This Act restores the SAB as 

an important defender of scientific integrity. This common—these 

commonsense reforms will make EPA’s decisions more credible and 

balanced. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. LUCAS

I thank Chairman Smith for bringing this important legislation to a markup. 

H.R. 1431, The Science Advisory Board Reform Act, ensures that the most qualified and capable scientists are free to undertake a balanced and open review of regulatory science. 

The Science Advisory Board (or S-A-B) was created in 1978 to provide independent expert advice on scientific and technical information. This information is 

used to justify important policy decisions and should be held to a high standard. 

In the subsequent decades and years, there have been serious deficiencies with 

the SAB and the process to select Board Members. Among other issues, there has 

been limited public participation, EPA interference with expert advice, and potential 

conflicts of interest. If the EPA undermines the Board’s independence or prevents 

it from providing candid advice to Congress, then the SAB serves no value to the 

EPA. 

The Board should be free to function as intended to ensure that sound science is 

driving policy decisions. We must reaffirm the Board’s independence so that the 

public can be confident that policy decisions are not hi-jacked by a pre-determined 

political agenda. 

It’s time to update the law to restore scientific integrity to the process and independence to the Board. 

In the previous Congress, a substantially similar bill passed the House with bipartisan support. This time around, we worked to revise this bill to ensure the best 

advisory process for the SAB. 

The Science Advisory Board Reform Act of 2017 addresses SAB shortcomings and 

deficiencies by guaranteeing a well-balanced expert panel, increasing transparency, 

and encouraging public participation. This empowers the experts to provide meaningful and unbiased scientific advice. 

This Act also addresses the need for Board membership from state, local and tribal governments. Currently on the Chartered SAB, there are only two members representing States. The fact that states like my home state of Oklahoma have no 
65 

Board members, even though we play a prominent role in the agriculture and energy industries, both of which are heavily regulated by the EPA, is troubling. Furthermore, this bill prevents current SAB members from holding EPA grants or contracts, as well as from receiving those funds within three years following the end 

of that member’s service on the Board. 

The bill also ensures that uncertainties in scientific conclusions are clearly communicated and allows the expert panel to focus on the science, rather than partisan 

policy debates. The language also codifies a requirement of the Board to respond to 

dissenting scientific views, and for comments to be published in the Federal Register. For ease of public access, these comments will be grouped by common theme 

and will not include reprinting of repetitious comments. 

This legislation recognizes the important role science should play to inform policy 

debates. The safeguards provided in this bill will ensure public confidence, by requiring the use of sound science when informing regulatory decisions. This act restores the SAB as an important defender of scientific integrity. 

These common sense reforms will make EPA’s decisions more credible and balanced. 

Mr. LUCAS. And without objection, Mr. Chairman, I would like 

to add the following letters of support for H.R. 1431 into the record. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the letter will be made a 

part of the record. 

Mr. LUCAS. The Farm Bureau, the Portland Cement Association, 

the National Sand and Gravel Association, Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council, the National Association of Homebuilders, 

Dr. Pat Michaels, Professor Will Harper, the American Exploration 

Production Council, the Independent Petroleum Association of 

America, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lucas. 

The gentlewoman from Texas, the Ranking Member, Ms. Johnson, is recognized for her opening statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Like the HONEST Act, I strongly oppose the Science Advisory 

Reform Act, and, at the core, I oppose this bill for many of the same 

reasons. This bill is a transparent attempt to slow down the regulatory process and stack science review boards with industry representative. The result would be similar to the HONEST Act: 

Worse science at the EPA and less public health protections for 

American citizens. 

The problems with this legislation are three-fold. First, the bill 

makes it easier for industry representatives to serve on science advisory boards by only requiring them to disclose their conflicts of 

interest. I have no problem with industry representation on these 

advisory boards, and in fact, under the requirements of the Federal 

Advisory Committee Acts, science advisory panels are required to 

be balanced of composition. However, this bill would allow unlimited participation by financially conflicted industry representatives, 

and that is a part I cannot support. 

The second major problem with this legislation is that it would 

make it much more difficult for scientists with extramural research 

grants from EPA to serve on the Board. This prohibition is likely 

to eliminate consideration of the top scientists in the relevant fields 

serving on science advisory boards. In conjunction with the loosened industry financial conflict requirements, this prohibition will 

result in science advisory panels with less qualified scientists and 

more conflicts of interest. 
66 

Finally, this legislation contains incredibly burdensome public 

comment requirements. The bill prevents comment cutoff dates, requires detailed review and reporting of comments, and requires the 

advisory panels to respond to any significant comments, especially 

those that run counter to mainstream science. The end result of 

this is to delay the Science Advisory Board’s reviews and force the 

agency to expend resources it simply does not have. 

We are in an unprecedented time right now. For the past three 

Congresses, the Chairman of this Majority—his Majority colleagues 

on the Science Committee have repeatedly attacked the ability of 

the EPA to use the best available science to improve public health. 

We now have a President who has attacked mainstream scientific 

views repeatedly. The threats to the scientific enterprise in America right now are profound. These threats have the potential to do 

great damage to American industry, American competitiveness, 

and the health of our citizens. 

I will vigorously oppose these efforts every step of the way, and 

I urge my colleagues to do the same. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Like the HONEST Act, I strongly oppose the Science Advisory Reform Act. And, 

at the core, I oppose this bill for many of the same reasons. This bill is a transparent attempt to slow down the regulatory process and stack science review boards 

with industry representative. The result would be similar to the HONEST Act— 

worse science at the EPA and less public health protections for American citizens. 

The problems with this legislation are three-fold. First, the bill makes it easier 

for industry representatives to serve on science advisory boards by only requiring 

them to disclose their conflicts of interest. I have no problem with industry representation on these advisory boards, and in fact, under the requirements of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Acts, science advisory panels are required to have a 

balanced composition. However, this bill would allow unlimited participation by financially conflicted industry representatives, and that I cannot support. 

The second major problem with this legislation is that it would make it much 

more difficult for scientists with extramural research grants from EPA to serve on 

the board. This prohibition is likely to eliminate consideration of the top scientists 

in the relevant fields serving on science advisory boards. In conjunction with the 

loosened industry financial conflict requirements, this prohibition will result in 

science advisory panels with less qualified scientists and more conflicts of interest. 

Finally, this legislation contains incredibly burdensome public comment requirements. The bill prevents comment cutoff dates, requires detailed review and reporting of comments, and requires the advisory panels to respond to any significant 

comments, especially those that run counter to mainstream science. The end result 

of this is to delay the SABs’ reviews and force the agency to expend resources it 

simply doesn’t have. 

We are in an unprecedented time right now. For the past three Congresses the 

Chairman and his Majority colleagues on the Science Committee have repeatedly attacked the ability of the EPA to use the best available science to improve public 

health. We now have a President who has attacked mainstream scientific views repeatedly. The threats to the scientific enterprise in America right now are profound. 

These threats have the potential to do great damage to American industry, American competitiveness, and the health of our citizens. I will vigorously oppose these 

efforts every step of the way, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. 

I yield back 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

Is there anyone who wishes to offer an amendment or be recognized? 

Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici, 

is recognized for 5 minutes. 
67 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I want 

to start by thanking Mr. Lucas for his goal of having a diverse 

functioning Science Advisory Board at the EPA. It’s a laudable 

goal. 

Unfortunately, this particular bill is not going to do what the intent is, and it has many problems that the Ranking Member pointed out, and I just want to point out, as recognized by several letters 

in opposition including one from the American Lung Association, 

that this bill is going to add this notice and comment component 

to all parts of the Board’s actions, and that causes a burdensome 

and unnecessary requirement. The reviews of the major issues are 

already covered under public notice and comment. It’s going to discourage people from participating. 

And also, as the Union of Concerned Scientists points out, this 

legislation explicitly allows experts with financial ties to corporations that are affected by Science Advisory Board assessments, 

they are not excluded from the Boards, but scientists, academic experts who have experience, are prohibited, and that essentially 

turns, as the Union of Concerned Scientists says, the idea of conflict of interest on its head because there’s a presumption that corporate experts with direct financial interest are not conflicted but 

academics who work on these issues are. 

So I suggest that we go back to the drawing board and find a 

way to improve the Science Advisory Board that doesn’t have these 

problems that are going to result in industry experts but not academic scientific experts on the Science Advisory Boards. 

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

time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici. 

Anybody else? The gentleman from Illinois, Dr. Foster, is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. FOSTER. Yes. I move to strike the last word. 

I’d just like to briefly point out that according to the Bureau of 

Labor Statistics, there are 1.54 million professors in the United 

States, so the fact that the sponsors of this bill were able to find 

one of those 1.54 million professors that support this bill I think 

speaks volumes about the level of support by academics and scientists for this bill. 

Thank you, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Foster. 

The gentlewoman from Connecticut, Ms. Esty, is recognized. 

Ms. ESTY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the last 

word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. ESTY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Again, I agree with my colleague, Mr. Lucas, that we do want to 

have diverse viewpoints reflected in the Science Advisory Board. 

However, as many of my colleagues have noted, this bill, I think, 

fails to achieve that. 

I want to note for a moment the resource question. This imposes 

new requirements, extends and basically eliminates any timeline 

for comments, and an obligation to respond. At the same time, no 

additional resources are called for, and that does not even begin to 

address the fact that the incoming Administration has proposed a 
68 

25 percent cut in agency resources—25 percent. And I think it is 

irresponsible for this Committee to impose additional burdens of 

reporting and response at the same time not only not offering resources but backing budget proposals that would do massive cut in 

resources. 

I am very concerned about the conflicts of interest that are being 

proposed here. To have paid industry experts be considered independent and to have scientists who—and I have a husband who 

works at your alma mater, Mr. Chairman, and I can tell you, professors have to raise grant money all the time for their research. 

One of the few places they can do that—if you’re a climate scientist 

or if you are looking at epidemiology at Yale, you often are seeking 

Federal grants. That’s the only way you’re going to get your research done. And yet this proposal I’m afraid would disqualify such 

people not only from voting on grants involving themselves, which 

is of course completely appropriate, but would be an out-and-out 

ban. 

We are going to be depriving the independent Science Advisory 

Board of exactly the kind of capability that we need to have, and 

I think we’re all already to work with Mr. Lucas and with you, Mr. 

Chairman, on what we can do to diversify. If there are sectors that 

feel they’ve been excluded, we should work on that, but this is 

overly broad, will be dangerous to the independence of science, exclude much of the expertise we need to have, too broad a brush and 

no resources, in fact, at the same time we’re expecting a cut in resources. 

So I respectfully must urge my colleagues to vote against this 

bill. 

Thank you very much, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Esty. 

If the gentleman from Texas will withdraw his request for time, 

I’d like to recognize—— 

Mr. BABIN. Sure. 

Chairman SMITH [continuing]. Someone on the other first. The 

gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Beyer, is recognized. 

Mr. BEYER. I feel bad taking time from the gentleman from 

Texas, but I move to strike the last word, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Mr. Beyer is recognized. 

Mr. BEYER. And I just want to associate myself with the remarks 

of Ms. Bonamici and Ms. Esty, that while I very much respect Mr. 

Lucas’s leadership on this bill, and I want to vote for it, but for the 

dilemma that we are now bringing industry representatives in as 

long as there’s a clear disclosure of conflict of interest and yet completely excluding professors who may well have a conflict of interest even because they may be working in the future. It seems that 

we have tilted the scales upside down, and if what should be good 

for the goose, good for the gander, that if there’s a disclosure, that 

that’s the principle of participation, then let’s make that fair for 

the professors also. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Beyer. 

Are there other Members who wish to be recognized? If not, the 

gentleman from Texas, Mr. Babin, is recognized. 

Mr. BABIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’d like to yield my time 

to the gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Lucas. 
69 

Mr. LUCAS. I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding, and 

I’ve listened to the very focused and sincere points by my colleagues, but I’d have to note to everyone as we work our way 

through this markup, this bill does not change the fact that the 

EPA still chooses the members of the Board, and the issue about 

are the best professionals being ignored and their insights being 

not used is of great concern to me. 

The bill also seeks to balance transparency, and we’ve talked 

about that, in the makeup and composition of the Board. In fact, 

financial conflicts of interest are specifically prohibited in the language, and in addition to the prohibition on conflicted individuals 

from participating, the bill most importantly, I think, requires 

members’ disclosure. Let us all know what their economic interests 

are in the process of being on the Board. 

Now, we’ve talked about the grants and the money, and I would 

remind my colleagues, considering the magnitude of the recent direct grants given to members of the SAB and the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, in the past as many as 60 percent 

have received grants worth almost $140 million. So perhaps we 

should, if anything, err on the side of balancing those concerns. 

Now, I know there’s a legitimate concern also in the text about 

the unlimited comment period, but I would tell you rather that it 

attempts to prevent arbitrary efforts to silence important concerns. 

The bill does not require the Board to respond to every comment, 

only to make their responses to significant comments that are 

based on the hypothesis-based science publicly available. I think 

that’s a very important distinction. 

And the public’s right to know. Let’s be honest, it is important 

that that the public have access to this information so that they 

have confidence in the results. If we’re asking decisions to be made 

that affect their lives every day at home and at business, then they 

have the right, I think, to have confidence and that experience will 

add to it. 

And furthermore, I’d leave one last thought to all my colleagues 

here. Many of you don’t know the new EPA Director personally. He 

is a very energetic, very bright attorney. Elections have consequences. If perhaps in the last session you were concerned about 

what this would do to the EPA, I would suggest to you, you should 

be with me now to potentially address your concerns from this 

point on. 

Just food for thought as I ask my colleagues to pass the bill, and 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Babin. Thank you, Mr. Lucas. 

If there are no amendments, a reporting quorum being present, 

I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 1431 to the House with the recommendation that the bill 

be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 1431 to the House. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it. The bill is ordered reported favorably but a roll 

call vote has been requested, and the clerk will call the roll. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith? 

Chairman SMITH. Aye. 
70 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith votes aye. 

Mr. Lucas? 

Mr. LUCAS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lucas votes aye. 

Mr. Rohrabacher? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Brooks? 

Mr. BROOKS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Brooks votes aye. 

Mr. Hultgren? 

Mr. HULTGREN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Hultgren votes aye. 

Mr. Posey? 

Mr. POSEY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Posey votes aye. 

Mr. Massie? 

Mr. MASSIE. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Massie votes aye. 

Mr. Bridenstine? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber? 

Mr. WEBER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber votes aye. 

Mr. Knight? 

Mr. KNIGHT. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Knight votes aye. 

Mr. Babin? 

Mr. BABIN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Babin votes aye. 

Mrs. Comstock? 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Comstock votes aye. 

Mr. Palmer? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Loudermilk? 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Loudermilk votes aye. 

Mr. Abraham? 

Mr. ABRAHAM. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Abraham votes aye. 

Mr. LaHood? 

Mr. LAHOOD. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. LaHood votes aye. 

Mr. Webster? 

Mr. WEBSTER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Webster votes aye. 

Mr. Banks? 

Mr. BANKS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Banks votes aye. 

Mr. Biggs? 

Mr. BIGGS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Biggs votes aye. 

Mr. Marshall? 

Mr. MARSHALL. Aye. 
71 

The CLERK. Mr. Marshall votes aye. 

Mr. Dunn? 

Mr. DUNN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Dunn votes aye. 

Mr. Higgins? 

Mr. HIGGINS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Higgins votes aye. 

Ms. Johnson? 

Ms. JOHNSON. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson votes no. 

Ms. Lofgren? 

Ms. LOFGREN. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Lofgren votes no. 

Mr. Lipinski? 

Mr. LIPINSKI. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lipinski votes no. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

Ms. BONAMICI. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Bonamici votes no. 

Mr. Bera? 

Mr. BERA. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Bera votes no. 

Ms. Esty? 

Ms. ESTY. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Esty votes no. 

Mr. Veasey? 

Mr. VEASEY. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Veasey votes no. 

Mr. Beyer? 

Mr. BEYER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Beyer votes no. 

Ms. Rosen? 

Ms. ROSEN. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Rosen votes no. 

Mr. McNerney? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Perlmutter? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Perlmutter votes no. 

Mr. Tonko? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Foster? 

Mr. FOSTER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Foster votes no. 

Mr. Takano? 

Mr. TAKANO. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Takano votes no. 

Ms. Hanabusa? 

Ms. HANABUSA. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Hanabusa votes no. 

Mr. Crist? 

Mr. CRIST. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Crist votes no. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report. 
72 

The CLERK. Mr. Chairman, 19 Members vote aye; 14 Members 

vote nay. 

Chairman SMITH. The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 
73 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY· 1151

h Congress Full Committee Roll Call 

Working Quorum: 13 Reporting Quorum: 20 

DATE: 3/9/17 

Bill: H.R. 1431 Final Passage 

MEMBER AYE NO PRESENT NOT VOTING 

1 Mr. SMITH, Chair· TX X 

2 Mr. LUCAS- OK ** X 

3 Mr. ROHRABACHER- CA 

4 Mr. BROOKS- AL X 

5 Mr. HULTGREN -/L X 

6 Mr. POSEY- FL X 

7 Mr. MASSIE - KY X 

8 Mr. BRIDENSTINE - OK 

9 Mr. WEBER- TX X 

10 Mr. KNIGHT- CA X 

Mr. BABIN - TX X 

Mrs. COMSTOCK- VA X 

13 Mr. PALMER- AL 

14 Mr. LOUDERMILK- GA X 

15 Mr. ABRAHAM -LA X 

16 Mr. LAHOOD -IL X 

17 Mr. WEBSTER- FL X 

X 

19 Mr. BIGGS - AZ X 

20 Mr. MARSHALL - KS X 

21 Mr. DUNN-FL X 

22 Mr. HIGGINS - LA X 

1 Ms. JOHNSON, Ranking • TX X 

2 Ms. LOFGREN -CA X 

3 Mr. LIPINSKI - IL X 

4 Ms. BONAMICI- OR X 

5 Mr. BERA-CA X 

6 Ms.ESTY CT X 

7 Mr. VEASEY- TX X 

8 Mr. BEYER- VA X 

9 Ms. ROSEN - NV X 

10 Mr. MCNERNEY- CA 

11 Mr. PERLMUTTER co X 

12 Mr. TONKO- NY 

13 Mr. FOSTER- IL X 

14 Mr. TAKANO CA X 

15 Ms. HANABUSA- HI X 

16 Mr. CRIST FL X 

17 VACANT 

TOTALS 19 14 

•• Vice Chair 
74 

Without objection, the Motion to Reconsider is laid upon the 

table. H.R. 1431 is ordered reported to the House, and I ask unanimous consent that staff authorized to make any necessary technical 

and conforming changes, and without objection, so ordered. 

Before we adjourn, I just want to thank all Members on both 

sides for their attendance today. I really appreciate everybody’s 

being here. This is good for the Committee. It’s good for the Members to hear the debate as well. 

If there is no further discussion, that completes our business, 

and we stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 10:24 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 
(75) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 1430, H.R. 1431 
76 

G:\M\15\SMITIX\SMITIX_OIO.XML 

[DISCUSSION DRAFf] 

115TH CONGRESS H R 

1ST SESSION 

• • 

[-114H1030] 

To prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from proposing, finalizing, 

or disseminating regulations or assessments based npon science that 

is not transparent or reproducible. 

IN THE HOUSE O.B., REPRESENTATIVES 

Mr. SMITH of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on~----------

A BILL 

To prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from proposing, finalizing, or disseminating regulations or assessments based upon science that is not transparent or 

reproducible. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Honest and Open New 

5 EPA Science Treatment Act of 2017" or the "HONEST 

6 Act". 

g:\VHLC\030617\030617.099.xml 

March 6, 2017 (12:08 p.m.) 

(65311817) 
77 

G:\M\15\SMITIX\SMITI'X_O 1 O.XML 

2 

1 SEC. 2. DATA TRANSPARENCY. 

2 Section 6(b) of the Environmental Research, Devel3 opment, and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1978 

4 (42 U.S.C. 4363 note) is amended to read as follows: 

5 "(b)(l) The Administrator shall not propose, finalize, 

6 or disseminate a covered action unless all scientific and 

7 technical information relied on to support such covered ac8 tion is9 "(A) the best available science; 

10 "(B) specifically identified; and 

11 "(C) publicly available online in a manner that 

12 is sufficient for independent analysis and substantial 

13 reproduetion of research results, except that any 

14 personally identifiable information, trade secrets, or 

15 eommercial or financial information obtained from a 

16 person and privileged or confidential, shall be re17 dacted prior to public availability. 

18 "(2) The redacted information described m para19 graph (1)(0) shall be diselosed to a person only after such 

20 person signs a written confidentiality agreement with the 

21 Administrator, subjeet to guidanee to be developed by the 

22 Administrator. 

23 "(3) Nothing m the subsection shall be construed 

24 as25 "(A) requiring the Administrator to disseminate 

26 scientifie and technical information; 

g:IVHLC\0306171030617.099.xml 

March 6, 2017 (12:08 p.m.) 

(65311817) 
78 

G:\M\15\SMITIX\SMITTX_OlO.XML 

3 

I "(B) superseding any nondiscretionary statu2 tory requirement; or 

3 "(C) requiring the Administrator to repeal, re4 issue, or modify a regulation in effect on the date of 

5 enactment of the Honest and Open New EPA 

6 Science Treatment Act of 2017. 

7 " ( 4) In this subsectionS "(A) the term 'covered action' means a risk, ex9 posure, or hazard assessment, criteria document, 

10 standard, limitation, regulation, regulatory impact 

II analysis, or guidance; and 

I2 "(B) the term 'scientific and technical informa13 tion' includesI4 . "(i) materials, data, and associated protoIS cols necessary to understand, assess, and exI6 tend conclusions; 

I7 "(ii) computer codes and models involved 

I8 m the creation and analysis of such informaI9 tion; 

20 "(iii) recorded factual materials; and 

2I "(iv) detailed descriptions of how to access 

22 and use such information. 

23 "(5) The Administrator shall carry out this sub24 section in a manner that does not exceed $1,000,000 per 

g:\VHLC\030617\030617.099.xml 

March 6, 2017 (12:08 p.m.) 

(65311817) 
79 

G:IM\15\SMIITX\SMmX_OIO.XML 

4 

1 fiscal year, to be derived from amounts otherwise author2 ized to be appropriated.". 

g:\VHLC\030617\030617.099.xml 

March 6, 2017 (12:08 p.m.) 

(65311817) 
80 

G:\M\15\LUCAS\LUCAS_002.XML 

[-ll4H1029j 

(Original Signature of Member) 

115Tn CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H.R. 

To amend the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration 

Authorization Act of 1978 to provide for Scientific Advisory Board member qualifications, public participation, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPHESENTATIVES 

Mr. I,ucAS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on ______________________ _ 

A BILL 

To amend the Environmental Research, Development, and 

Demonstration Authorization Act of 1978 to provide for 

Scientific Advisory Board member qualifications, public 

participation, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of Amm·ica in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "EPA Science Advisory 

5 Board Reform Act of 2017". 

g:IVHLG\030317\030317.179.xml 

March 3, 2017 (4:26 p.m.) 

(65324611) 
81 

G:\M\15\LUCAS\LUCAS_002.XML 

2 

1 SEC. 2. SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD. 

2 (a) INDEPENDENT .ADVICE.-Section 8(a) of the En3 vironmental &search, Development, and Demonstration 

4 Authorization Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 4365(a)) is amend5 ed by inserting "independently" after "Advisory Board 

6 which shall". 

7 (b) MEMBERSHIP.-Section 8(b) of the Environ8 mental Research, Development, and Demonstration Au9 thorization Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 4365(b)) is amended 

10 to read as follows: 

11 "(b)(l) The Board shall be composed of at least nine 

12 members, one of whom shall be designated Chairman, and 

13 shall meet at such times and places as may be designated 

14 by the Chairman. 

IS "(2) Each member of the Board shall be qualified by 

16 education, training, and experience to evaluate scientific 

17 and technical information on matters referred to the 

18 Board under this section. The Administrator shall ensure 

19 that20 "(A) the scientific and technical points of view 

21 represented on and the functions to be performed by 

22 the Board are fairly balanced among the members of 

23 the Board; 

24 "(B) at least ten percent of the membership of 

25 the Board are from State, local, or tribal govern26 ments; 

g:\VHLC\030317\030317.179.xml 

March 3, 2017 (4:26 p.m.) 

(65324611) 
82 

G:\M\15\LUCAS\LUCAS_002.XML 

3 

"(C) persons with substantial and relevant ex2 pertise are not excluded from the Board due to af3 filiation with or representation of entities that may 

4 have a potential interest in the Board's advisory ac5 tivities, so long as that interest is fully disclosed to 

6 the Administrator and the public and appointment 

7 to the Board complies with section 208 of title 18, 

8 United States Code; 

9 "(D) in the case of a Board advisory activity on 

10 a particular matter inYolving, or for which the Board 

11 has evidence that it may involve, a specific party, no 

12 Board member having an interest in the specific 

13 party shall participate in that activity; 

14 "(E) Board members may not participate in ad15 visory activities that directly or indirectly involve re16 view or evaluation of their own work, unless fully 

17 disclosed to the public and the work ha.-; been exter18 nally peer-reviewed; 

19 "(F) Board members shall be designated as 

20 special Government employees; 

21 "(G) no registered lobbyist is appointed to the 

22 Board; and 

23 "(H) a Board member shall have no current 

24 grants or contracts from the Environmental Protec25 tion Agency and shall not apply for a grant or cong:IVHLC\030317\030317.179.xml 

March 3, 2017 (4:26 p.m.) 

(65324611) 
83 

G:\M\l5\LUCAS\LUCAS_002.XML 

4 

1 tract for 3 years following the end of that member's 

2 service on the Board. 

3 "(3) The Administrator shall4 "(A) solicit public nominations for the Board by 

5 publishing a notification in the Federal Register; 

6 "(B) solicit nominations from relevant Federal 

7 agencies, including the Departments of Agriculture, 

8 Defense, Energy, the Interior, and Health and 

9 Human Services; 

10 "(C) solicit nominations from11 "(i) institutions of higher education (as de12 fined in section lOl(a) of the Higher Education 

13 Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. lOOl(a))); and 

14 "(ii) scientific and research institutions 

15 based in work relevant to that of the Board; 

16 "(D) make public the list of nominees, includ17 ing the identity of the entities that nominated each, 

18 and shall accept public comment on the nominees; 

19 "(E) require that, upon their provisional nomi20 nation, nominees shall file a written report disclosing 

21 financial relationships and interests, including Envi22 ronmental Protection Agency grants, contracts, co23 operative agreements, or other financial assistance, 

24 that are relevant to the Board's advisory activities 

25 for the three-year period prior to the date of their 

g:\VHLC\030317\030317.179.xml 

March 3. 2017 (4:26p.m.) 

(65324611) 
84 

G:\M\15\LUCAS\LUCAS_002.XML 

5 

1 nomination, and relevant professional activities and 

2 public statements for the five-year period prior to 

3 the date of their nomination; and 

4 "(F) make such reports public, with the excep5 tion of specific dollar amounts, for each member of 

6 the Board upon such member's selection. 

7 "( 4) Disclosure of relevant professional activities 

8 under paragraph (3)(E) shall include all representational 

9 work, expert testimony, and contract work as well as iden10 tifying the party for which the work was done. 

11 "(5) Except when specifically prohibited by law, the 

12 Agency shall make all conflict of interest waivers granted 

13 to members of the Board, member committees, or inves14 tigative panels publicly available. 

15 "(6) Any recusal agreement made by a member of 

16 the Board, a member committee, or an investigative panel, 

17 or any recusal known to the Agency that occurs during 

18 the course of a meeting or other work of the Board, mem19 ber committee, or investigative panel shall promptly be 

20 made public by the Administrator. 

21 "(7) The terms of the members of the Board shall 

22 be three years and shall be staggered so that the terms 

23 of no more than one-third of the total membership of the 

24 Board shall expire within a single fiscal year. No member 

25 shall serve more than two terms over a ten-year period.". 

g:\VHLC\030317\030317.179.xml 

March 3, 2017 (4:26 p.m.) 

(65324611) 
85 

G:IM\15\LUCAS\LUCAS_002.XML 

6 

(c) RECORD.-Section S(c) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 

2 4365(e)) is amended3 ( 1) in paragraph ( 1 )-

4 (A) by inserting "or draft risk or hazard 

5 assessment," after "at the time any proposed"; 

6 (B) by striking "formal"; and 

7 (C) by inserting "or draft risk or hazard 

8 assessment," after "to the Board such pro9 posed"; and 

10 (2) in paragraph (2)-

11 (A) by inserting "or draft risk or hazard 

12 assessment," after "the scientific and technical 

13 basis of the proposed"; and 

14 (B) by adding at the end the following: 

15 "The Board's advice and comments, including 

16 dissenting views of Board members, and the re17 spouse of the Administrator shall be included in 

18 the record with respect to any proposed risk or 

19 hazard assessment, criteria document, standard, 

20 limitation, or regulation and published in the 

21 Pederal Register.". 

22 (d) MEMBER CoMMIT'rEES AL'\!D lr--'VES'l'IGATIVE PAN23 ELS.-Section 8(e)(1)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 

24 4365(e)(1)(A)) is amended by adding at the end the folg:IVHLC\030317\030317.179.xml 

March 3. 2017 (4:26 p.m.) 

(65324611) 
86 

G:\M\15\LUCAS\LUCAS_002.XML 

7 

lowing: "These member committees and investigative pan2 els3 "(i) shall be constituted and operate 

4 in accordance with the provisions set forth 

5 in paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection 

6 (b), in subsection (h), and m subsection 

7 (i); 

8 "(ii) do not have authority to make 

9 decisions on behalf of the Board; and 

10 "(iii) may not report directly to the 

11 Environmental Protection Agency.". 

12 (e) PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.-Section 8 of such Act 

13 (42 U.S.C. 4365) is amended by amending subsection (h) 

14 to read as follows: 

15 "(h)(l) 'fo facilitate public participation in the advi16 sory activities of the Board, the Administrator and the 

17 Board shall make public all reports and relevant scientific 

18 information and shall provide materials to the public at 

19 the same time as received by members of the Board. 

20 "(2) Prior to conducting major advisory activities, the 

21 Board shall hold a public information-gathering session to 

22 discuss the state of the science related to the advisory ac23 tivity. 

24 "(3) Prior to convening a member committee or in25 vestigative panel under subsection (e) or requesting scig:\VHLC\030317\030317.179.xml 

March 3, 2017 (4:26p.m.) 

(65324611) 
87 

G:IM\15\LUCASILUCAS_002.XML 

8 

1 entific advice from the Board, the Administrator shall ac2 cept, consider, and address public comments on questions 

3 to be asked of the Board. The Board, member committees, 

4 and investigative panels shall accept, consider, and adS dress public comments on such questions and shall not ac6 eept a question that unduly narrows the scope of an advi7 sory activity. 

8 "(4) The Administrator and the Board shall encour9 age public comments, including oral comments and discus10 sion during the proceedings, that shall not be limited by 

11 an insufficient or arbitrary time restriction. Public com12 ments shall be provided to the Board when received, and 

13 shall be published in the Federal Register grouped by com14 mon themes. If multiple repetitious comments are re15 ccived, only one such comment shall be published along 

16 with the number of such repetitious comments received. 

17 Any report made public by the Board shall include written 

18 responses to significant comments, including those that 

19 present an alternative hypothesis-based scientific point of 

20 view, offered by members of the public to the Board. 

21 "(5) Pollowing Board meeting'S, the public shall be 

22 given 15 calendar days to provide additional comments for 

23 consideration by the Board.". 

g:\VHLC\0303171030317.179.xml 

March 3, 2017 (4:26 p.m.) 

(65324611) 
88 

G:\M\15\LUCAS\LUCAS_002.XML 

9 

(f) 0PERATIONS.-Section 8 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 

2 4365) is further amended by amending subsection (i) to 

3 read as follows: 

4 "(i)(l) In carrying out its advisory activities, the 

5 Board shall strive to avoid making policy determinations 

6 or recommendations, and, in the event the Board feels 

7 compelled to offer policy advice, shall explicitly distinguish 

8 between scientific determinations and policy advice. 

9 "(2) The Board shall clearly communicate uncertain-

! 0 ties associated with the scientific advice provided to the 

11 Administrator or Congress. 

12 "(3) The Board shall ensure that advice and com13 ments reflect the views of the members and shall encour14 age dissenting members to make their views kno\vn to the 

15 public, the Administrator, and Congress. 

16 "( 4) The Board shall conduct periodic reviews to en17 sure that its advisory activities arc addressing the most 

18 important scientific issues affecting the Environmental 

19 Protection Agency. 

20 "(5) The Board shall be fully and timely responsive 

21 to Congress.". 

g:\VHLC\030317\030317.179.xml 

March 3, 2017 (4:26p.m.) 

(65324611) 
89 

G:\M\15\LUCAS\LUCAS_002.XML 

10 

1 SEC. 3. RELATION TO THE FEDERAL ADVISORY COM· 

2 MITTEE ACT. 

3 Nothing in this Act or the amendments made by this 

4 Act shall be construed as supplanting the requirements of 

5 the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.). 

6 SEC. 4. RELATION TO THE ETHICS IN GOVERNMENT ACT OF 

7 1978. 

8 Nothing in this Act or the amendments made by this 

9 Act shall be construed as supplanting the requirements of 

10 the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.). 

g:\VHLC\030317\030317.179.xml 

March 3, 2017 (4:26 p.m.) 

(65324611) 

(91) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUP ON H.R. 2105, 

NIST SMALL BUSINESS 

CYBERSECURITY ACT OF 2017 

TUESDAY, MAY 2, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room 2318 

of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith [Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman SMITH. With the agreement of the Ranking Member 

and with the understanding that other Members are on their way, 

we’re going to start our markup. 

The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to 

order. 

Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recess at 

any time, and without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare 

recesses of the Committee at any time. 

Pursuant to Committee Rule II(e) and House Rule 112(2)(h)(4), 

the Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes. 

Today we meet to consider H.R. 2105, the NIST Small Business 

Cybersecurity Act of 2017. H.R. 2105 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 2105, 

the NIST Small Business Cybersecurity Act of 2017. The clerk will 

report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 2105, a bill to require the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology to disseminate guidance to help reduce—— 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

I’ll recognize myself for an opening statement. 

Welcome to today’s Full Committee markup of H.R. 2105, the 

NIST Small Business Cybersecurity Act of 2017. I thank the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Webster, for introducing this important 

and timely bipartisan bill. 

This bill directs the National Institute of Standards and Technology to provide small businesses with cybersecurity guidelines, 

tools, best practices, standards, and methodologies necessary to 

better protect themselves. This guidance will be made publicly 

available on NIST’s and other relevant agencies’ websites. 
92 

Small businesses are frequently the target of cyber-attacks, but 

these businesses often do not have sufficient information to adequately monitor and protect their computer systems. 

This week we celebrate National Small Business Week, a decades-long tradition recognizing the many contributions made to the 

American economy by small businesses. Small businesses help 

produce a thriving economy that benefits our entire country. They 

bring innovative ideas, cutting-edge products and services, and jobs 

to the marketplace. 

In my home State, for example, there are more than 2.4 million 

small businesses that employ almost 4–1/2 million Texans. 

But even as they become more innovative, sophisticated, and productive, small businesses are drawing unwanted attention from 

cybercriminals. These hackers attempt to take advantage of the 

small businesses’ limited capabilities and cyber inexperience as 

compared to their larger counterparts. According to the U.S. National Cyber Security Alliance, 60 percent of small businesses go 

bankrupt 6 months after a cyber-attack. And another institute 

notes that recovering from a cyber-attack can cost the average 

small business $690,000; for middle market companies, that cost is 

more than $1 million. 

Today’s legislation engages the services of NIST to help small 

businesses reduce their cybersecurity risks. 

NIST experts developed a Cybersecurity Framework through collaborations between the government and private sector. This 

Framework is accepted and used by many private organizations to 

address and manage their cybersecurity risk in a cost-effective way. 

The guidance described in this bill to help small businesses is 

based on the NIST Cybersecurity Framework. 

H.R. 2105 is similar to Senate bill S. 770, the MAIN STREET 

Cybersecurity Act, which the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee favorably reported unanimously by voice vote 

last month. Representative Webster’s bill, cosponsored by Research 

and Technology Subcommittee Chairwoman Barbara Comstock and 

Ranking Member Dan Lipinski, serves an important purpose by 

helping to protect small businesses from cybersecurity attacks. I 

thank them for their initiative on this issue and I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2105. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

Good morning and welcome to today’s Full Committee markup of H.R. 2105, the 

NIST Small Business Cybersecurity Act of 2017. I thank the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Webster, for introducing this important and timely bipartisan bill. 

This bill directs the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to 

provide small businesses with cybersecurity guidelines, tools, best practices, standards, and methodologies necessary to better protect themselves. 

This guidance will be made publicly available on NIST’s and other relevant agencies’ websites. 

Small businesses are frequently the target of cyber-attacks, but these businesses 

often do not have sufficient information to adequately monitor and protect their 

computer systems. 

This week we celebrate National Small Business Week, a decades-long tradition 

recognizing the many contributions made to the American economy by small businesses. 

Small businesses help produce a thriving economy that benefits our entire country. They bring innovative ideas, cutting-edge products and services, and jobs to the 

marketplace. In my home state, for example, there are more than 2.4 million small 

businesses that employ almost four and a half million Texans. 
93 

But even as they become more innovative, sophisticated, and productive, small 

businesses are drawing unwanted attention from cybercriminals. These hackers attempt to take advantage of the small businesses’ limited capabilities and cyber inexperience as compared to their larger counterparts. 

According to the U.S. National Cyber Security Alliance, 60% of small businesses 

go bankrupt six months after a cyber-attack. And the Ponemon Institute notes that 

recovering from a cyber-attack can cost the average small business $690,000; for 

middle market companies, that cost is more than $1 million. 

Today’s legislation engages the services of NIST to help small businesses reduce 

their cybersecurity risks. 

NIST experts developed a Cybersecurity Framework, through collaborations between the government and private sector. This Framework is accepted and used by 

many private organizations to address and manage their cybersecurity risk in a 

costeffective way. The guidance described in this bill to help small businesses is 

based on the NIST Cybersecurity Framework. 

H.R. 2105 is similar to Senate bill S.770, the MAIN STREET Cybersecurity Act, 

which the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee favorably reported unanimously by voice vote last month. 

Representative Webster’s bill, cosponsored by Research and Technology Subcommittee Chairwoman Barbara Comstock and Ranking Member Dan Lipinski, 

serves an important purpose by helping to protect small businesses from 

cybersecurity attacks. I thank them for their initiative on this issue and I urge my 

colleagues to support H.R. 2105. 

Chairman SMITH. The Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from 

Texas, Eddie Bernice Johnson, is recognized for her opening statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

H.R. 2105, the NIST Small Business Cybersecurity Act of 2017, 

addresses a significant need to provide more guidance, resources, 

and tools to small businesses to secure their information systems 

and protect the personal information of their customers. 

According to the Small Business Administration, the 28 million 

small businesses in America account for 54 percent of all U.S. 

sales. Small businesses provide 55 percent of all jobs and 66 percent of all net new jobs since 1970. Small businesses play a central 

role in our economy. Unfortunately, the information systems and 

networks of small businesses are especially vulnerable. Small businesses rarely have trained cybersecurity employees and often do 

not prioritize cybersecurity or have the resources to do so. 

The National Institute of Standards and Technology, or NIST, 

has been a leader in developing standards and guidelines for 

cybersecurity in the public and private sectors before the word 

‘‘cybersecurity’’ was even part of our policy vocabulary. 

In 2009, NIST developed a guidance document called, Small 

Business Information Security: The Fundamentals. The document 

was the result of an interagency effort and was designed to present 

the fundamentals of an effective small business information security program in non-technical language. 

In 2014, in response to an Executive Order from President 

Obama, NIST published the Cybersecurity Framework for Critical 

Infrastructure, which we have discussed extensively in this Committee. The Cybersecurity Framework is most useful for larger 

businesses with at least some information technology expertise. 

Therefore, in November 2016, NIST published an update of their 

small business guidance document, using the Framework as a template. 
94 

In addition to this guidance, NIST assists small businesses directly through their work at the Cybersecurity Center for Excellence in Gaithersburg, Maryland. 

Further, under the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education, NIST leads an activity they call the Small Business Corner. 

In collaboration with the Small Business Administration and the 

FBI, they conduct training meetings on computer security for small 

businesses. 

H.R. 2105 is consistent with all of those ongoing activities at 

NIST and with the agency’s mission. Ideally, H.R. 2105 would also 

provide resources for NIST to expand these activities, because the 

need is clear. 

Unfortunately, the Majority has once again brought up a bill directing the agency to do more with less. If this just happened occasionally, it might not be a problem. Every agency should periodically assess their programs and identify opportunities to 

reprioritize funding and implement new efficiencies. However, with 

respect to NIST in particular, the Majority has piled on one significant new responsibility after another, without providing additional 

funding. And now, based on the Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Blueprint, 

we anticipate damaging cuts to NIST from the Trump Administration. 

I am pleased that we can agree on a bipartisan basis that NIST 

is an important agency that does excellent work across many areas 

with a relatively small budget. I just wish we could also agree that 

money does not grow on the trees at the NIST campus. We must 

be prepared to pay for what we value, or we will simply not accomplish the laudable goals of this legislation or any other activities 

we deem to be priorities. 

Mr. Chairman, I support H.R. 2105, and I thank the sponsors, 

including Mr. Webster, Mr. Lipinski, and Ms. Rosen, and their 

strong support for small businesses and NIST’s important role in 

cybersecurity. However, I am concerned that the House bill contains an explicit underfunded mandate clause and that the Senate 

version is silent on funding. I hope that if we have the opportunity 

to negotiate a conference agreement, both bodies will see fit to provide NIST with adequate resources to fulfill the mandates in this 

legislation. 

I thank you, and yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you Mr. Chairman. H.R. 2105, the NIST Small Business Cybersecurity Act 

of 2017, addresses a significant need to provide more guidance, resources, and tools 

to small businesses to secure their information systems and protect the personal information of their customers. According to the Small Business Administration, the 

28 million small businesses in America account for 54 percent of all U.S. sales. 

Small businesses provide 55 percent of all jobs and 66 percent of all net new jobs 

since the 1970s. Small businesses play a central role in our economy. Unfortunately, 

the information systems and networks of small businesses are especially vulnerable. 

Small businesses rarely have trained cybersecurity employees and often do not 

prioritize cybersecurity or have the resources to do so. The National Institute of 

Standards and Technology, or NIST, has been a leader in developing standards and 

guidelines for cybersecurity in the public and private sectors before the word 

cybersecurity was even part of our policy vocabulary. In 2009, NIST developed a 

guidance document called, Small Business Information Security: The Fundamentals. 

The document was the result of an interagency effort and was designed to present 

the fundamentals of an effective small business information security program in 
95 

non-technical language. In 2014, in response to an Executive Order from President 

Obama, NIST published the Cybersecurity Framework for Critical Infrastructure, 

which we have discussed extensively in this Committee. The Cybersecurity Framework is most useful for larger businesses with at least some information technology 

expertise. Therefore, in November 2016, NIST published an update of their small 

business guidance document, using the Framework as a template. In addition to 

this guidance, NIST assists small businesses directly through their work at the 

Cybersecurity Center for Excellence in Gaithersburg, Maryland. Furthermore, under 

the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education, NIST leads an activity they call 

the ‘‘Small Business Corner.’’ In collaboration with the Small Business Administration and the FBI, they conduct training meetings on computer security for small 

businesses. H.R. 2105 is consistent with all of these ongoing activities at NIST and 

with the agency’s mission. Ideally, H.R. 2105 would also provide resources for NIST 

to expand these activities, because the need is clear. Unfortunately, the Majority 

has once again brought up a bill directing the agency to do more with less. If this 

just happened occasionally, it might not be a problem. Every agency should periodically assess their programs and identify opportunities to reprioritize funding and 

implement new efficiencies. However, with respect to NIST in particular, the 

Majority has piled on one significant new responsibility after another, without 

providing additional funding. And now, based on the FY 2018 Budget Blueprint, we 

anticipate damaging cuts to NIST from the Trump Administration. I am pleased 

that we can agree on a bipartisan basis that NIST is an important agency that does 

excellent work across many areas with a relatively small budget. I just wish we 

could also agree that money does not grow on the trees at the NIST campus. We 

must be prepared to pay for what we value, or we will simply not accomplish the 

laudable goals of this legislation or any other activities we deem to be priorities. Mr. 

Chairman, I support H.R. 2105, and I thank the sponsors, including Mr. Webster, 

Mr. Lipinski, and Ms. Rosen, for their strong support for small businesses and 

NIST’s important role in cybersecurity. However, I am concerned that the House bill 

contains an explicit unfunded mandate clause and that the Senate version is silent 

on funding. I hope that if we have the opportunity to negotiate a conference agreement, both bodies will see fit to provide NIST with adequate resources to fulfill the 

mandates in this legislation. With that I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson, and the sponsor of 

the bill, the gentlemen from Florida, Mr. Webster, is recognized for 

a statement. 

Mr. WEBSTER. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for scheduling this markup, especially timely since this is National Small 

Business Week. 

America’s small businesses are the backbone of our economy accounting for 54 percent of the American sales and 55 percent of 

American jobs. Unfortunately, small businesses are especially vulnerable and some reports note that it’s 43 percent of cyber-attacks 

specifically target them. 

H.R. 2105, the National Institute of Standards and Technology 

Small Business Cybersecurity Act of 2017, will help small businesses better address their cybersecurity risks to help them survive 

and thrive in the face of such adversary. 

As an owner of a multi-generational, three-generational air conditioning and heating business, I understand firsthand the importance of equipping and empowering small businesses to tackle 

these challenges. 

Just a few months ago, one of my associates came in to our office, 

and on the screen it says your computer has been hacked, your 

data is frozen, and pay us a certain amount of money, a pretty good 

bit of money, by 24 hours or we’re going to destroy it. So that was 

a little bit of a concern, and—but I wasn’t going to pay a ransom 

so I told our people let’s see what we can do, so it ended up, we 

had a 2-day-old jump drive where we had backed up by chance all 

of the data that had been frozen, so we—our IT guy wiped the hard 
96 

disk, put the new data on, and then we re-upped it. It took us— 

we had to put the last 2 days of business on there, and it worked 

out. However, I think with the information that we could get from 

NIST and this bill if it were in place, we would have been better 

prepared to know what to do and how to do it so that the incident 

never happened to begin with. 

So I know that there are thousands and thousands of businesses 

across the country who are seeing that every day. When they walk 

into their office, they have a ransom note, and many—I ended up 

talking to one person who had paid that ransom, and they were sad 

they did because about—they released their data, everything was 

fine, and 3 months later they did it again. So this is a thriving, 

awful business that’s being used to be—that’s perpetrated some 

pretty bad things against small businesses who are just trying to 

make a living. 

So this bill, H.R. 2105, will provide small businesses in my district and across the State and across the country with the tools 

they need to actually circumvent these threats and challenges of 

the modern world, and I think a lot of times myself and my sons 

that run our business now tend to think, you know, this is only for 

big business, these are all the businesses that get highlighted on 

the news every night, that’s the only ones that are at risk, and 

never really thought about the fact that we as a small business 

were at risk and knew nothing about these ransom notes that were 

being done. 

So there’s a similar bill in the Senate that’s moving alone, MAIN 

STREET Cybersecurity Act. It’s supported by the Small Business 

Administration, the National Restaurant Association, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, International Technique Group, and the Chamber of International Techni groups that have also come out in support of this H.R. 2105 and Senate 770, which passed the Senate’s 

Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee in April by a 

voice vote. 

I ask my colleagues to similarly support H.R. 2015 in a bipartisan manner so that we may prepare it for the House floor Action. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for bringing up this bill and 

supporting this important bill today to help small businesses. 

I yield back the rest of my time. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. WEBSTER

Thank you Mr. Chairman for scheduling this markup today - it is especially timely as we celebrate National Small Business Week. 

America’s small businesses are the backbone of our economy accounting for 54 

percent of all American sales and 55 percent of American jobs. Unfortunately, small 

businesses are especially vulnerable, with some reports noting that 43 percent of 

cyber attacks specifically target them. 

H.R. 2105, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Small 

Business Cybersecurity Act of 2017, will help small businesses better address their 

cybersecurity risks to help them survive - and thrive - in the face of such adversity. 

As an owner of a multi-generational family air conditioning and heating business, 

I understand first-hand the importance of equipping and empowering small businesses to tackle challenges, so that they can grow and prosper. Thus, a couple weeks 

ago, I introduced H.R. 2105 with the support and cosponsorship of many of my colleagues on the Committee, including Chairman Smith, Chairwoman Comstock, and 

Ranking Member Lipinski. 

H.R. 2105 will provide small businesses in my district, state and across the country with the tools they need to meet the threats and challenges of the modern world. 

The bill: 
97 

• describes the vital role played by small businesses in the U.S. economy, the devastating impact of cyberattacks on a majority of small businesses, and the need 

to develop simplified resources to help them; 

• directs the NIST Director - within a year of the Act’s enactment - to disseminate clear and concise resources, which are defined as guidelines, tools, best 

practices, standards, methodologies, and other ways of providing information. 

• Dissemination would be in consultation with heads of other Federal agencies. 

• These resources - based on the NIST Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity - will help small businesses identify, assess, manage, 

and reduce their cybersecurity risks. 

H.R. 2105 also: 

• clarifies that use of the resources by small businesses is voluntary; 

• directs the NIST Director, and heads of Federal agencies that so elect, to make 

the resources available on their government websites; and 

• specifies that no new funds are authorized to carry out this Act. 

This bill is very similar to Senate bill S.770, the MAIN STREET Cybersecurity 

Act, which is supported by the National Small Business Association, the National 

Restaurant Association, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce - which also supports 

H.R. 2105. S.770 passed the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee in April by a voice vote, and I ask my colleagues to similarly support H.R. 

2105 in a bipartisan manner, so we may prepare it for House floor action. 

Thank you again Mr. Chairman for bringing up and supporting this important bill 

today to help small businesses. I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Webster, and also, thank you 

for recounting your personal experience in regard to the subject at 

hand. 

The gentlewoman from Nevada, Ms. Rosen, is recognized for a 

statement. 

Ms. ROSEN. Thank you, Chairman Smith and Ranking Member 

Johnson for holding today’s markup on the NIST Small Business 

Cybersecurity Act, a bill that I am very proud to cosponsor. 

Last year, the majority of all targeted cyber-attacks were directed at small businesses. What’s even scarier is that 60 percent 

of small businesses successfully attacked, they actually go out of 

business within 6 months. 

Despite these facts, according to the National Cybersecurity Alliance Survey, nearly six out of ten small business, small-and medium-sized businesses, do not have a contingency plan outlining 

their procedures for responding and reporting data breach losses. 

Many of these businesses do not have the resources to invest in 

a dedicated IT staff with the expertise to monitor and protect their 

computer systems. However, I believe with proper guidance on how 

to develop an information security program, small business can 

take the steps to protect their employees and their customers. 

That’s why I’m a proud cosponsor of NIST Small Business 

Cybersecurity Act. This bill requires the Director of National Institute of Standards and Technology, known as NIST, to provide 

small businesses with resources to identify and protect their digital 

assets from cybersecurity threats. 

H.R. 2105 creates a simple, voluntary set of guidelines that are 

specifically tailored for use by small businesses. We all know small 

businesses are the backbone of our economy in southern Nevada. 

Las Vegas and the surrounding communities are home to hundreds 

of local businesses employing actually over 400,000 workers in our 

State. 

Unfortunately, over the past several years, our casinos, our hotels and many of our other small businesses have suffered from 

cyber-attacks. This legislation that we’re reviewing today would 
98 

greatly benefit small-and medium-sized businesses in my district, 

ensuring that they have the tools to protect themselves from 

cybersecurity threats. 

I thank you, and I urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 2105. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Rosen. 

We will now proceed with amendments in the order listed on the 

roster. The first and only amendment offered by the gentlemen 

from California, Mr. McNerney, and I want to thank him for cosponsoring the bill, and the gentlemen is recognized. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Well, I thank the Chair, I thank Mr. Webster 

and Mr. Rosen, and I have an amendment that will—— 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 2105 offered by Mr. McNerney 

of California, amendment #042. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment as read, 

and the gentlemen is recognized to explain his amendment. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I have a simple amendment, and it will improve the bill. It requires that the resources that NIST provides to small businesses 

include case studies of practical applications of cyber protection 

and recovery. 

Small businesses are becoming a major target of cyber-attacks as 

we’ve heard. Small businesses are increasingly adopting information technology to store, process and communicate information. Although the proliferation of technology has provided small businesses with many benefits, it has also increased the attack surface 

for these cyber-attacks. Small businesses are generally very limited 

in resources and expertise. The owner of small businesses often are 

the only ones who handle cybersecurity-related matters along with 

a wide range of other responsibilities that Mr. Webster can attest 

to. 

This is why it’s critical that any information small businesses are 

provided with on how to better protect their companies against 

cyber-attacks be easy to understand and apply. Giving examples of 

how other businesses of similar size apply a particular 

cybersecurity guidance would be an important step toward achieving that goal. 

Small businesses are the engine of economic growth and job creation in our Nation. In my district alone, there are over 31,000 

small businesses. As Ms. Rosen mentioned, a recent study found 

that 60 percent of small businesses go out of business within 6 

months of a cyber-attack. This suggests that if we want to see improved economic growth, we must help small businesses improve 

their cybersecurity. 

As a cosponsor of 2105, I’m glad to see that we are considering 

legislation aimed at improving cybersecurity resources for small 

businesses. However, if we truly want to help businesses better understand how to utilize resources, it’s important that these resources include case studies of practical applications. My amendment addresses this, and I urge my colleagues to support it, and 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. McNerney. 

And the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Webster, is recognized. 

Mr. WEBSTER. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 
99 

I believe this amendment offered by the gentlemen from California, our colleague, is consistent with the desires of this bill, and 

I think it also would aid in protecting from cybersecurity attacks, 

and I support the amendment and I ask my colleagues to do the 

same. 

Chairman SMITH. I’ll recognize myself simply to say I think this 

amendment improves an already good bill, and I appreciate the 

gentlemen offering it. 

Is there further discussion on the amendment? 

If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by 

Mr. McNerney. 

All in favor, say aye. 

All opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

If there are no further amendments, reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 2105 to the House as amended with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 2105 to the House 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

Without objection, the Motion to Reconsider is laid upon the 

table. H.R. 2105 is ordered reported to the House, and I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any necessary technical and conforming changes. Without objection, so ordered. 

If there is no further discussion, that completes our business of 

the day. Thank you all for being here, and we stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 10:21 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(101) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 2105, AMENDMENT ROSTER
102 

AUTHEN.T!CA.T£9 

US GOV£RNMENT 

!NFORMAT!ON 

GPO 

115TH CONGRESS H R 21 05 1ST SESSION 

• • 

To require the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology 

to disseminate guidance to help reduce small business cybersecurity risks, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 20, 2017 

Mr. WEBSTER of Florida (for himself, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mr. SMITH of Texas, 

Mrs. COMSTOCK, Ms. ROSEN, Mr. HULTGREN, Mr. !CJ'IIGHT, Mr. 

LAHooD, Mr. lVIARSHAJ,L, and Mr. POSEY) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

A BILL 

To require the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology to disseminate guidance to help 

reduce small business cybersecurity risks, and for other 

purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives ofthe United States qj'America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "NIST Small Business 

5 Cybersecurity Act of 2017". 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress makes the following findings: 
103 

2 

1 (1) Small businesses play a vital role in the 

2 economy of the United States, accounting for 54 

3 percent of all United States sales and 55 percent of 

4 jobs in the United States. 

5 (2) Attacks targeting small and medium busi6 nesses account for a high percentage of cyberattacks 

7 in the United States. Sixty percent of small busi8 nesses that suffer a cyberattack are out of business 

9 within 6 months, according to the National Cyber 

10 Security Alliance. 

11 (3) The Cybersccurity Enhancement Act of 

12 2014 (15 U.S.C. 7421 ct seq.) calls on the National 

13 Institute of Standards and Technology to facilitate 

14 and support a voluntary public-private partnership 

15 to reduce cybcrsecurity risks to critical infrastruc16 ture. Such a partnership continues to play a key role 

17 in improving the cyber resilience of the United 

18 States and making cyberspace safer. 

19 ( 4) There is a need to develop simplified re20 sources that arc consistent with the partnership de21 scribed in paragraph (3) that improves its use by 

22 small businesses. 

23 SEC. 3. IMPROVING CYBERSECURITY OF SMALL BUSI24 NESSES. 

25 (a) DEFINITIONS.-ln this section: 

•HR 2105 m 
104 

3 

(1) DIREC'l'OR.-The term "Director" means 

2 the Director of the National Institute of Standards 

3 and Technology. 

4 (2) RESOURCES.-The term "resources" means 

5 guidelines, tools, best practices, standards, meth6 odologies, and other ways of providing information. 

7 (3) SMALl, BUSINESS CONCERN.-The term 

8 "small business concern" has the meaning given 

9 such term in section 3 of the Small Business Act 

10 (15 u.s.c. 632). 

11 (b) SMAI,L BUSINESS CYBERSECURI'l'Y.-Section 

12 2(e)(1)(A) of the National Institute of Standards and 

13 Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 272(e)(l)(A)) is amended14 (1) in clause (vii), by striking "and" at the end; 

15 (2) by redesignating clause (viii) as clause (ix); 

16 and 

17 (3) by inserting after clause (vii) the following: 

18 "(viii) consider small business con19 cerns (as defined in section 3 of the Small 

20 Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632)); and". 

21 (c) DISSEMINATION OF RESOURCES FOR S!VIALL 

22 BUSINESSES.-

23 (1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than one year 

24 after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Di25 rector, in carrying out section 2(e)(1)(A)(viii) of the 

•HR 21os m 
105 

4 

1 National Institute of Standards and Technology Act, 

2 as added by subsection (b) of this Act, in consulta3 tion with the heads of other appropriate E1

ederal 

4 agencies, shall disseminate clear and concise re5 sources to help small business concerns identify, as6 sess, manage, and reduce their cybersecurity risks. 

7 (2) REQUIREMENTS.-The Director shall eu8 sure that the resources disseminated pursuant to 

9 paragraph (1)-

10 (A) are generally applicable and usable by 

11 a wide range of small business concerns; 

12 (B) vary with the nature and size of the 

13 implementing small business eoncern, and the 

14 nature and sensitivity of the data collected or 

15 stored on the information systems or devices of 

16 the implementing small business concern; 

17 (C) include elements, that promote aware18 ness of simple, basic controls, a workplace cy19 bersecurity culture, and third-party stakeholder 

20 relationships, to assist small business concerns 

21 in mitig-ating common cybersecurity risks; 

22 (D) are technology-neutral and can be im23 plemented using technologies that are commer24 cial and off-the-shelf; and 

•HR 21os m 
106 

5 

1 (E) are based on international standards 

2 to the extent possible, and arc consistent with 

3 the Steyenson-Wydlcr Technology Innovation 

4 Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3701 et seq.). 

5 (3) NATIONAl" CYBERSECURITY AWARENESS 

6 AND EDUCATION PROGRAM.-Thc Director shall en7 sure that the resources disseminated under para8 graph (1) arc consistent ·with the efforts of the Di9 rector under section 401 of the Cybersecurity En10 hancement Act of 2014 (15 U.S.C. 7451). 

11 ( 4) SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER 

12 CYBER STRATEGY.-ln carrying out paragraph (1), 

13 the Director, to the extent practicable, shall consider 

14 any methods included in the Small Business Devel15 opment Center Cyber Strategy developed under sec16 tion 1841(a)(3)(B) of the National Defense Author17 ization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 (Public Law 114-

18 328). 

19 (5) VOLUNTARY RESOURCES.-The use of the 

20 resources disseminated under paragraph (1) shall be 

21 considered voluntary. 

22 (6) UPDATES.-The Director shall review and, 

23 if necessary, update the resources disseminated 

24 under paragraph (1) in accordance with the require25 ments under paragraph (2). 

•HR 2105 IH 
107 

6 

(7) PUBijiC AVAILABIIjiTY.-The Director and 

2 the head of each Federal agency that so elects shall 

3 make prominently available on the respective agen4 cy's public Internet website information about the 

5 resources and updates to the resources disseminated 

6 under paragraph ( 1). The Director and the heads 

7 shall each ensure that the information they respec8 tively make prominently available is consistent, clear, 

9 and concise. 

10 (d) OTHER .B~EDERAL CYBERSECURITY REQUIRE11 MENTS.-Nothing in this section may be construed to su12 persede, alter, or otherwise affect any cybersecurity re13 quirements applicable to Federal agencies. 

14 (e) FUNDING.-This Act shall be carried out using 

15 funds otherwise authorized to be appropriated or made 

16 available to the National Institute of Standards and 'l'ech17 nology. 

0 

•HR 21os m 
108 

G:\M\15\MCNERN\MCNERN_042.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 2105 

OFFERED BY MR. MCNERNEY OF CALIFORNIA 

Page 4, after line 21, insert the following (and redesignate accordingly): 

1 

2 

g:\VHLC\042817\042817.069.xml 

April28, 2017 (11 :03 a.m.) 

(D) include case studies of practical application; 

(65889411) 
(109) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUP ON H.R. 2809, 

AMERICAN SPACE COMMERCE 

FREE ENTERPRISE ACT OF 2017 

THURSDAY, JUNE 8, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:14 p.m., in room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. 

Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of 

the Committee at any time. Pursuant to Committee Rule II(e) and 

House Rule 112(2)(h)(4), the Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes. 

Today we meet to consider H.R. 2809, the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 2017. 

Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 2809, the American Space 

Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 2017, and the clerk will report the 

bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 2809, a bill to amend Title 51, United States 

Code, to provide for the authorization and supervision of non-governmental space activities, and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. And without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point, and I’ll recognize myself for an opening statement. 

H.R. 2809 establishes a legal and policy environment intended to 

unleash American free enterprise and business, assure conformity 

with Outer Space Treaty obligations, and ensure that the United 

States will lead the world in commercial space activities throughout the 21st century. 

This bill will promote investment and innovation, resulting in 

the creation of new high-paying and high-value jobs across the 

country. It will increase American competitiveness and attract companies, talent, and money that otherwise would have gone to other 

countries. It ensures America and its work force will benefit from 

the new space economy. 

The problem this bill seeks to address is the kind of legal uncertainty that arose after Bigelow Aerospace and Moon Express 

sought payload approval from the Department of Transportation 

for its non-traditional space activities. The payload review and ap-
110 

proval process is meant to prevent launches of payloads that jeopardize American interests and safety. It is not designed to satisfy 

the State Department’s concerns about complying with Article VI 

of the Outer Space Treaty. Under the Treaty, signatories are to authorize and provide continuing supervision of their country’s nongovernmental space activities. In the case of Bigelow and Moon Express, the executive branch stated that it would not be able to assure the public that new and innovative space activities would be 

approved for launch in the future. 

The goal of this bill is not to regulate space broadly or to address 

all of the possible future challenges that the private sector will face 

in outer space. Doing so would be premature and likely to stifle innovation and investment. Instead, the bill takes a commonsense 

approach by establishing a legal foundation upon which U.S. industry can flourish. It establishes a transparent U.S. authorization 

and supervision certification process for non-governmental space 

activities that provides regulatory certainty for the U.S. commercial 

space sector. It assures compliance with United States Outer Space 

treaty obligations and addresses national security concerns in the 

least burdensome manner possible. 

The bill includes a provision that consolidates at the Department 

of Commerce’s Office of Space Commerce existing regulatory authority spread across three different Federal agencies now. America 

gets a one-stop shop for authorizing activities that will take place 

in outer space. It also streamlines remote sensing regulations to 

ensure that United States national security is addressed not by 

holding America’s space industry back, but by empowering it to 

lead the world. 

Absent this bill, American industry would continue to face legal 

uncertainty. Innovation would be subject to a burdensome and 

open-ended regulatory process, with no assurance of Outer Space 

Treaty compliance. 

An initial draft of the legislation before us now was publicly presented over a month ago for any and all input. We have spent the 

past month meeting, listening, and considering specific, detailed 

comments from outside stakeholders, interested Federal agencies, 

the Administration, and our Committee colleagues including those 

from the Minority side of this Committee. Many if not most of their 

recommendations and requested changes have been included. 

Over the past few days, we have received letters and statements 

of support for the bill from the following entities: AgileAero, Inc. 

Atmospheric and Environmental Research, Atmospheric & Space 

Technology Research, Axiom Space, Bigelow Aerospace, Blue Origin 

Carmel Research Center, the Commercial Spaceflight Federation, 

which consists of hundreds of members, Digital Globe, Inc. 

GeoOptics, Moon Express, Panasonic, Planet Labs, Inc., Satellite 

Industry Association, Space Frontier Foundation, Spaceport Strategies, Spire Global, Space Environment Technologies, Space Florida, 

SpaceX, Students for the Exploration and Development of Space, 

and TechFreedom. Without objection, the letters we have received 

will be included in the record. I want to thank these groups for 

their support of the legislation. 
111 

From: 

To: 

Agile Aero, Inc. 

602 North Baird 

Suite 200 

Midland, TX 79701 

June 7, 2017 

Rep. Lamar Smith 

Chairman Smith, 

Agile Aero 

Quietly, for many years, a debate has taken place in government and commercial space policy circles about the 

proper legal structure for handling actions by U.S. entities that take place far from Earth. The American Space 

Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 2017 brilliantly resolves some of the contradictions inherent in more traditional 

models and proposes a new and, in my opinion, very effective legal structure for future activities. 

We currently have a "permission first" approach for launch and reentry activities, driven by concerns over the 

potential risks to the uninvolved public from rocket launches. Today, no Federal agency has jurisdiction over the 

purely in-space activities for future activities such as private space stations, satellite servicing and refueling, or 

private missions to the Moon. And yet, both simple prudence and the treaty obligations of the United States 

require us to ensure that the peaceful activities of U.S. entities do not interfere with the peaceful activities of other 

nations, so some Federal scrutiny is called for. A more traditional structure of seeking permission for each new 

type of activity has the inherent problem that when something has never been done, a host of questions comes up 

which take a long time to answer. 

The bill solves that problem by placing the burden of decision on the Federal review rather than on private actors, 

some of whom will be small innovative companies- by a very American approach to the problem. U.S. citizens are 

the primary authority in the United States, the Federal government has only the powers delegated to it. U.S. 

citizens will be the primary actors in space, under this regime; they will notify the Federal government of their 

action far enough for the Federal government to confirm that there are no treaty violations or national security 

concerns, and then, unless the Federal government moves to stop the action, it is permitted. This is an excellent 

model for maintaining U.S. national security and foreign policy responsibilities while encouraging a wide range of 

innovative commercial activities in space. 

The concept of a central registry also provides a non-regulatory mechanism by which, over time, U.S. entities can 

cooperate with each other and with non U.S. entities to coordinate their activities and areas of operation. 

No one today can foresee all of the businesses and companies which might flourish under such a regime, and no 

regulatory agency could possibly have suitable, clear regulatory guidance for all of those things which are 

unforeseeable. Together, under this bills structure, we can all discover new ways for space assets and resources to 

contribute to the economy of the Earth. 

Jeff Greason 

CEO, Agile Aero 
112 

June 7, 2017 

Committee on Space, Science and Technology 

US House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith, 

131 HartweU Avenue 

Lexington, Massachusetts 

02421-3126 

USA 

Tel: +1 781 761-2288 

Fax: +1 781 761-2299 

www.aer.com 

Thank you for your efforts on the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 2017 in the 

Committee on Science, Space and Technology. AER is a member of the American Commercial 

Space Weather Association (ACSWA) and supports the bi-partisan efforts developing this bill. We 

support efforts to bring it before the House of Representatives as soon as possible. 

The Act has a number of important provisions, including simplifYing and strengthening the outdated 

space-based remote sensing regulatory system. The Act will also enhance U.S. compliance with 

international obligations, improve national security, and eliminate cumbersome regulatory barriers 

facing new and innovative space technology companies. 

We support the creation of a single authority for registration of nongovernmental space activities 

located at the Department of Commerce Office of Space Commerce. We also support maintaining our 

international obligations to the Outer Space Treaty and recognizing WIY safety risks posed to our 

existing federal space systems. 

Atmospheric and Environmental Research (AER) provides science-based solutions to global 

environmental challenges. AER's internationally renowned scientists and software engineers 

collaborate to transform state-of-the-art predictive science and analytical tools into practical systems 

that address both civilian government and defense needs for geophysical understanding, computer 

simulation, and forecasting. Areas of expertise comprise atmospheric and environmental science, 

satellite remote sensing, oceanography, meteorology, space science, climate change, Wid software 

engineering. A unit of the Verisk Climate division at Verisk Analytics (Nasdaq:VRSK), AER was 

established in 1977 and is headquartered in Lexington, Mass. 

I thank you and the co-sponsors for your leadership on this important issue. 

'?if 

Guy P. Seeley, Ph.D. 

President 

CC: US Rep. BriWI Babin and US Rep. Jim Bridenstine 

Lexington. MA Greenbe~. MD Albuquerque. NM Omaha, NE Hampton. VA 
113 

ATMOSPHERIC & SPACE TECHNOLOGY 

RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, LLC 

5777 CENTRAL AVENUE • • BOULDER, COLORADO, USA 60301 

Date: June 7, 2017 

Committee on Space, Science and Technology 

US House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith, 

EIN: 20-2946717 DUNS# 60-1975803 

210-834-3475 

Thank you for marking up the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 2017 in the Committee 

on Science, Space and Technology. Attnospheric & Space Technology Research Associates (ASTRA) 

LLC is in strong support of the bi-partisan efforts in the development of this bill and we support efforts 

to bring it before the House of Representatives as soon as possible. 

The Act has a number of important provisions, most important is that the proposed legislation will 

simplify and strengthen the outdated space-based remote sensing regulatory system. Equally important is 

that the Act will enhance U.S. compliance with international obligations, will serve to improve national 

security and eliminates cumbersome regulatory barriers facing new and innovative space technology 

companies. 

We support the creation of a single authority for registration of nongovernmental space activities located 

at the Department of Commerce Office of Space Commerce; as well as, maintaining our international 

obligations to the Outer Space Treaty and recognizing any safety risks posed to our existing federal space 

systems. 

ASTRA is one of the leading U.S. commercial organizations providing space weather services and 

products. We have developed a new model of the upper atmosphere that is being transitioned to the 

USAF Joint Space Operations Center (JSpOC) at Vandenberg AFB. We have developed and flown a 

number of Cubesats, with several others currently under construction for NASA, NSF and the DoD. We 

have also developed and deployed an instrument for monitoring conditions in the ionosphere that can 

degrade and disrupt GPS signals and UHF satellite communications for both the DoD and commercial 

providers. Two of these systems are about to be deployed on NOAA buoys in the Pacific, and we have 

an array of systems distributed across Alaska. 

ASTRA is a Small Business, and also a proud member of the American Commercial Space Weather 

Association (ACSWA), an association dedicated to improving America's competitive edge in space. I 

thank you and the co-sponsors for your leadership on this important issue. 

Sincerely, 

Dr. Geoff Crowley, Ph.D. 

President & Chief Scientist 

CC: U.S. Rep. Brian Babin and U.S. Rep. Jim Bridenstine 
114 

June 7, 2017 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chairman 

17155 Feathercraft Lane 

Webster, Texas 77598 

tel. 281.823.9717 

House Committee on Science, Space and Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member 

House Committee on Science, Space and Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson, 

Axiom Space, LLC, is a company new to the arena of commercial space, but our team is 

anything but new to the world of human spaceflight. With our long history of keeping people 

healthy, happy and productive in space, our aim is to develop the world's first commercial space 

station, and to make living and working in space commonplace as a means to deeper space 

exploration. 

We have been following with interest the development of the American Space Commerce Free 

Enterprise Act of2017 in the Space Subcommittee. As a company who envisions a purely 

commercial business model, requesting no government funding and no guarantee of a 

government anchor tenant, we rely heavily on outside investment. Investors are, in tum, very 

focused on understanding risk, which includes knowing the impact of government-imposed 

regulation. For this reason, Axiom Space is fully supportive of the intent of the Act- to 

maximize certainty while minimizing the regulatory burden placed on new and innovative 

space companies. Since our expertise is in human spaceflight and not in regulatory policy, we 

cannot offer a path to achieve this goal, but simply voice our strong support of your intent to 

achieve it. 

Please don't hesitate to contact me if you'd like to hear more about Axiom Space. 

Sincerely, 

#/:/~ .. Michael~~ President and CEO 

Axiom Space axiomspoce.com 
115 

Hon. Lamar Smith 

Chairman 

2409 Rayburn 

House Office 

Building 

Washington, DC 

20515 

June8,2017 

Hon. Eddie 

Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member 

2468Raybum 

House Office 

Building 

Washington, DC 

20515 

Hon. Brian Babin 

Chairman 

316 Cannon 

House Office 

Building 

Washington, DC 

20515 

Hon. Ami Bera 

Ranking Member 

1431 Longworth 

House Office 

Building 

Washington, DC 

20515 

Dear Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson, Chairman Babin, and Ranking Member Bera: 

I am writing to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology today in strong 

support of the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act (ASCFEA) as introduced by 

Chairman Smith, Chairman Babin, Rep. Bridenstine, Rep. Ed Perlmutter, Rep. Rohrabacher, 

Rep. Hultgren, Rep. Weber, Rep. Higgins, and Rep. Kilmer. Bigelow Aerospace strongly 

endorses the core principles of the ASCFEA to ensure a regulatory "light touch" approach that 

enables technological innovation and also helps to promote safe operations in space under an 

authorization schema through the registration of space objects. I applaud the committee for 

working tirelessly on a bipartisan approach that upholds and enhances American leadership in 

space as well as lays the foundation for commercial space activities to grow and flourish. 

Bigelow Aerospace endorses the effort of the Committee to report the bill out favorably to the 

House of Representatives for further consideration. 

The ASCFEA addresses two main issues that Bigelow Aerospace believes needs 

resolution as soon as possible to ensure future coordination of commercial activities thereby 

promoting safety in space, to avoid regulatory uncertainty impeding capital and market 

formation, and to provide for timely approvals and appealable denials from the US Government 

for commercial, "non-traditional" space activities. First, the ASCFEA seeks to identify a Federal 

agency to handle the authorization schema for space objects. Second, the bill seeks to reorganize 

the interagency process relating to how the US Government shall review the proposed activities 

of space objects subject to an internal US registry system. However, overall, the ASCFEA 

provides much needed regulatory certainty to the commercial space industry as we bring online 

innovative and critical technologies to bring down the cost of access to space. 

With respect to the identification of a Federdl agency to handle the authorization schema 

for space objects, I understand that there are concerns regarding whether the Federal Aviation 

Administration's Office of Commercial Space Transportation (FAAIAST) or the Department of 

Commerce's Office of Space Commerce (DOC/OSC) should hold that authority. Bigelow 

Aerospace believes that it is prudent to seek a clear demarcation between launch and reentry 

from all other commercial, ''non-traditional" space activities that do not have a tmnsportation 

function. Given the projected cadence of space activities within the next five years, it is critical 

that the Congress make a decision that does not burden the ability of commercial space 

companies to conduct operations in space. Therefore, Bigelow Aerospace believes that the 
116 

DOC/OSC should have the authority to maintain an authorization for space objects because the 

ASCFEA woul<l provide for closer political responsiveness from the Secretary of Commerce and 

it would properly treat expandable habitat systems as destinations and not transportation. 

Moreover, no matter which Federal agency the Congress chooses to place the new 

authorities expressed in the ASCFEA within, Bigelow Aerospace believes that it is vitally 

important that the registration of space objects that form the basis of any authorization regime 

should be public enough to ensure that some notice is given to the operations of commercial 

activities in space. It is vital for safe operations in space that we maintain a timely, public 

registry of space objects that will help incentivize market formation for insurance and secured 

transactions, among other markets, establish duties of care in operations, and lay the foundation 

for de-conflicting operations between two or more spa1.:e objects. Any Federal agency with 

authority over the authorization of space objects must be able to handle a timely and updatable 

public registry of space objects. 

With respect to the reorganization of the interagency process to authorize and supervise 

commercial space activities, the ASCFEA contains the basic principles that Bigelow Aerospace, 

et al., previously articulated in a jointly signed letter to the Committee on March 8, 2017. In that 

letter, Bigelow Aerospace, Space Systems Loral, Deep Space Industries, and Space Florida 

expressed to the Committee that any Federal agency that has the authority to authorize and 

supervi'le commercial space activities should have a process that presumes approval, establishes 

a transparent and responsive process for approval, has defined deadlines, and provides a 

commercial entity with a clear understanding and ability to appeal as well as address denials or 

conditions when seeking a launch license. Moreover, these criteria are a product of concem'> 

raised and discussed between FAA/AST and the Deparlment of State with Bigelow Aerospace as 

a consequence of our payload review determination in 2014. Through that process, FAA/AST 

and the Department of State (DOS) worked together to identify the salient issues relating to the 

authorization and supervision of commercial, "non-traditional" space activities. We applaud the 

efforts of FAA/AST Associate Administrator George Neild and DOS Director of the Office of 

Space and Advanced Technology, Kenneth Hodgkins, as well a.~ former DOS Attorney-Advisor 

Brian Israel for their work to find a path forward to approving commercial, "non-traditional" 

space activities. I am elated that the Committee ha.~ found a possible solution to the concerns 

raised about the interagency process for commercial, "non-traditional" space activities. I thank 

the Committee for being receptive to the concerns raised by Bigelow Aerospace and others 

regarding the interagency proces.~. 

Bigelow Aerospace is greatly appreciative to the Committee Members and staff for 

dedicating their time and energy to drafting a bill that helps enable and support commercial 

markets for spacecraft like expandable habitat systems. We thank the Committee for considering 

the principles we laid out and look forward to working with Members and staff as the bill 

progresses through the legislative process. 

Director of Legislative Affairs 

Bigelow Aerospace, LLC 
117 

OR. OEVRIE S. INTRil.IGATOR, DIRECTOR 

CARMEl. RESEARCH CENTER/ SPACE PLASMA LABORATORY 

P. 0. BOX 2732, SANTA MONICA, CA 90406 

TEl.: (3l0}829-5215/FAX:(3l0)453·2983 /OEVRIEI@AOL.COM 

Committee on Space, Science and Technology 

US House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chainnan Smith, 

June 7, 2017 

Thank you for marking up the American Space Commerce Free Entetprise Act of 2017 in 

the Committee on Science, Space and Technology. Cannel Research Center, Inc. is in 

strong support of the bi-partisan efforts in the development of this bill and we support 

efforts to bring it before the House of Representatives as soon as possible. 

The Act has a number of important provisions, most important is that the proposed 

legislation will simplify and strengthen the outdated space-based remote sensing 

regulatory system. Equally important is that the Act will enhance U.S. compliance with 

international obligations, will serve to improve national security and eliminates 

cumbersome regulatory barriers facing new and innovative space technology companies. 

We support the creation of a single authority for registration of nongovernmental space 

activities located at the Department of Commerce Office of Space Commerce; as well as, 

maintaining our international obligations to the Outer Space Treaty and recognizing any 

safety risks posed to our existing federal space systems. 

Carmel Research Center, Inc. is an important business in space weather. We have 

worked in many of the basic space weather efforts including instrument development and 

implementation, and many diverse areas of theoretical and physics-based methods in 

predicting space weather events at Earth and throughout the solar system. 

Carmel Research Center, Inc. is also a member of the American Commercial Space 

Weather Association (ACSWA), which is dedicated to improving the USA's efforts in 

space research, space weather, and international competiveness. 

We thank you and the co-sponsors for your leadership on this important issue. 

Sincerely, O ..._ . {\ _ .± D~.lJ'I.~IY'-

Dr. Devrie S. lntriligator 

Director, Space Plasma Laboratory 

Carmel Research Center, Inc. 

CC: US Rep. Brian Babin and US Rep. Jim Bridenstine 
118 

June 7, 2017 

House Committee on Science, Space and Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith, 

Thank you for marking up the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 2017 in 

the Committee on Science, Space and Technology. GeoOptics strongly supports the bipartisan efforts to develop this bill as well as efforts to mark it up in the House Science 

Committee and bring it before the House of Representatives. 

The Act has a number of important provisions, including the establishment of a single 

authority for registration of nongovernmental space activities located at the Department 

of Commerce Office of Space Commerce; as well as, maintaining our international 

obligations to the Outer Space Treaty and recognizing any safety risks posed to our 

existing federal space systems. We strongly support this effort to streamline regulatory 

burdens and promote the commercial use of space. 

Under the proposed legislation, the space-based remote sensing regulatory system would 

undergo regularization and simplification, which is of particular importance to companies 

like ours that plan to develop new commercial remote sensing capabilities and seek a 

predictable regulatory regime for such activities. The Act would also ensure U.S. 

compliance with international obligations, promote evidence-based regulation, improve 

national security and eliminate cumbersome regulatory barriers facing new and 

innovative space technology companies. 

GeoOptics will soon launch the first of its constellation of small satellites that will 

provide advanced, affordable and reliable weather and environmental data to the Federal 

government and other customers. This data will help private and public decision-makers 

make well-informed decisions about natural resources around the world. 

I thank you and the co-sponsors of this legislation, Space Subcommittee Chairman Brian 

Babin and Rep. Jim Bridenstine for your leadership on this important issue. 

Sincerely, 

Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr. 

VADM USN (ret.) and CEO, GeoOptics 

CC: Rep. Brian Babin, Rep. Jim Bridenstine 
119 

MA~AR 

April 23, 2018 

Honorable Kevin McCarthy 

Majority Leader 

United States House of Representatives 

H-107 Capitol Building 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

House Committee on Science, Space, and 

Technology 

2409 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear LeadersTECHNOLOGIES 

Honorable Steny Hoyer 

Democratic Whip 

United States House of Representatives 

1705 Longworth House Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20515-6537 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

2468 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

As you may know, late last year, Maxar Technologies was formed. Maxar is the combination of Space 

Systems Lora I {SSL), MDA, DigitaiGiobe and Radiant Solutions. The combination has enabled leadership 

in satellite communications {building and operating), ground infrastructure, Earth observation, advanced 

analytics, insights from machine learning, next-generation propulsion, space robotics, and on-orbit 

servicing. Having just hit our six month mark as this new company, we are excited for the future. 

While our excitement grows for possibilities and advancements in space, we continue to be concerned 

about the regulatory restrictions the industry faces. This is why the passage of HR2809-The American 

Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act-is so critical. For too long, the remote sensing industry, in 

particular, has operated under outdated laws and regulations that are hampering international 

competitiveness. This bill will provide necessary updates that will help keep US industry an international 

leader and provide the transparency, timelines and predictability needed for technology advancements 

and investment. Further, it moves to establish a new office within the Department of Commerce for 

space activities. We believe this move will elevate space commerce appropriately within this 

department and commensurate with national interests. 

We applaud the Committee on Science, Space and Technology for their continued leadership on this 

issue and look forward to its passage. 

Sincerely, 

Marcy Steinke 

Senior Vice President 

Government Relations & Public Policy 

Maxar Technologies 

Maxar Technologies • Government Relations & Public Policy • 2107 Wilson Boulevard Suite 110, Arlington, VA 22201 

www.maxar.com • Telephone: 1-703-480-9588 
120 

June 8"', 201 7 

The Honorable lamar Smith 

Chair, House Committee on Science, 

Space & Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

111:: 

MOON EXPRESS 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member, House Committee on 

Science, Space & Technology 

394 Ford House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson: 

I am writing to express my endorsement and support of the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise 

Act (ASCFEA), as introduced by Chairman Smith, Chairman Babin, and Representative Bridenstine, and 

the markup by the Committee on Science, Space and Technology. 

As the first U.S. company to request and receive U.S. governmental 'mission approval' to send a 

private robotic spacecraft beyond traditional Earth orbit and to the Moon, we can attest to the need 

for certainty of process within a framework of minimal regulatory burden. Of particular importance 

to us and our plans for continuing commercial lunar operations, is the ASCFEA's goal to formally 

address the U.S. government's obligations under Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty to authorize and 

supervise "non-traditional" commercial space activities like ours. This legislation creates a clear, 

objective, transparent, timely and appealable process for American companies like Moon Express to 

pursue innovative commercial space activities beyond traditional Earth orbit. 

We are particularly pleased with the ASCFEA's creation of a new Private Space Activity Advisory 

Committee that will include private sector representation to help the Secretary of Commerce and a 

new Assistant Secretary for Commercial Space carry out their responsibilities under this legislation. 

The legislation supports a process that focuses and streamlines the regulatory framework, limits the 

government's role to a light touch, promotes American innovation and investment, and satisfies our 

international obligations. The premise of "presumed authorization within predefined boundary 

conditions" is the right approach to non-traditional commercial space activities beyond Earth orbit. 

The binding timeframe for review of a registration of a non-traditional commercial space mission is 

also vital to a workable "presumed authorization" regulatory framework. 

This legislation charts a clear path for the freedom of U.S. space enterprise to flourish, carrying 

forward strong foundational principles of the United States into the frontiers of space. I recognize and 

appreciate the Committee's continued bipartisan support for America's commercial space industry, and 

endorse it being reported favorably to the House of Representatives for further consideration. 

I am thankful to you, Chairman Babin, Mr. Bridenstine, and all your staff who have worked on 

developing this important legislation. I am particularly appreciative of the inclusive and transparent 

process that has welcomed and considered feedback from commercial space stakeholders on the key 

aspects of the bill. 

Thank you for your continuing leadership and support for the U.S. commercial space industry. I wish you 

a successful markup today. 

Moon Express lnc., 100 Spaceport way, Cape Canaveral, Fl32920 (650) 241-8577 1 of2 
121 

Sincerely, 

Dr. Robert (Bob) Richards 

Founder, President & CEO 

CC: 

The Honorable Kevin McCarthy 

The Honorable Brion Babin 

The Honorable Jim Bridenstine 

The Honorable Ami Bero 

The Honorable Ed Perlmutter 

The Honorable Derek Kilmer 

MOON EXPRESS 

Moon Express Inc., 100 Spaceport Way, Cape Canaveral, FL32920 (650) 241-8577 2of2 
122 

Panasonic 

June 7, 2017 

Committee on Space, Science and Technology 

US House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith, 

Thank you for marking up the American Sj)ace Commerce Free Entemrise Act of 2017 in the 

Committee on Science, Space and Technology. Pana.sonic is in strong support of the bi-partisan efforts 

in the development of this bill, and we support efforts to bring it before the House of Representatives as 

soon as possible. 

The Act has a number of important provisions, most important is that the proposed legislation will 

simplify and strengthen the outdated space-based remote sensing regulatory system. 

Equally important is that the Act will enhance U.S. compliance with international obligations, will serve 

to improve national security and eliminates cumbersome regulatory barriers facing new and innovative 

space technology companies. 

We support the creation of a single authority for registration of nongovernmental space activities located 

at the Department of Commerce Office of Space Commerce; as well as, maintaining our international 

obligations to the Outer Space Treaty and recognizing any safety risks posed to our existing federal 

space systems. 

Panasonic Avionics Corporation, a U.S. corporation, is a subsidiary of Panasonic Corporation of North 

America, the principal North American subsidiary of Panasonic Corporation. Panasonic Avionics 

Corporation utilizes space-based Ku-band high-throughput satellites to provide connectivity and 

communication solutions to the maritime and aviation industries. 

I thank you and the co-sponsors for your leadership on this important issue. -, 

Sincerely, ..•.. -_.7 ~ ,' 

c:-· ---~ 

Neil Jacobs 

CC: US Rep. Brian Babin and US Rep. Jim Bridenstine 

Panasonic Avionic& COrporation 3303 Monte Villa ParkWay, Bothell, WA 98012 

panasonic.aero 
123 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chair, House Committee on Science, 

Space & Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice johnson 

Ranking Member, House Committee on 

Science, Space & Technology 

394 Ford House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member johnson, 

9 June 2017 

Planetary Resources is In strong support of the American Space Commerce Free 

Enterprise Act (ASCFEA), H.R. 2B09. This legislation continues the leadership, vision, and 

bipartisanship of the Committee in support of America's commercial space industry. 

Building upon the Commercial Spat:e Launch and Competitiveness Act (CSLCA), P.L.l1+90, 

this legislation will enable our business to innovate and pioneer new economic 

opportunities in outer space in accordance with international law. 

Specifically, we are pleased to see a clear, transparent, and responsive process for 

Planetary Resources to plan and execute Its mission of asteroid prospecting and mining. 

This process creates the mechanism for the United States to authorize and supervise the 

activities of Its citizens in space, in accordance with Article VI of the 1967 Outer Space 

Treaty. 
124 

This legislation Is highly beneficial to the U.S. commercial space industry. Planetary 

Resources would like to highlight the foUowing areas that we believe would increase the 

effectiveness of the legislation: 

• With regard to §80304, we recommend amending the section to require concurrence 

of the Secretary of State or eliminating it altogether. Planetary Resources believes the 

State Department retains experience and ellpllrtise that is critical for informing the 

development of the least restrictive and most beneficial process to meet our 

international obligations and supporting industry. 

• With regard to §2(b )( 1 ), we recommend striking the phrase ''without conditions or 

limitations" because it is internally inconsistent. The subsections in the bill that 

follow provide conditions for the use of space by U.S. citizens and entities. 

• With regard to §80309, we recommend moving this language to §2(a), Findings, and 

changing the text to read: 

o That "global commons" is not a legal concept and neither gives rise to nor affects 

any of the United States international obligations. 

We are grateful for the persistent leadership and support this Committee provides 

to the commercial space industry. Planetary Resources looks forward to working with the 

Committee to ensure a competitive, stable, and forward-looking legal framework that 

enhances this market, meets our international obligations and continues the United States' 

leadership in commercial space activities. 

Respectfully, 

::::.:-=:~, Planetary Resources 
125 

CC: 

The Honorable Kevin McCarthy 

The Honorable Brian Babin 

The Honorable Ami Bera 

The Honorable Jim Bridenstine 

The Honorable Clay Higgins 

The Honorable Randy Hultgren 

The Honorable Derek KHmer 

The Honorable Ed Perlmutter 

The Honorable Dana Rohrabacher 

The Honorable Randy Weber 
126 

June 7,2017 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chairman 

House Committee on Science, Space, and 

Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Brian Babin 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Space 

House Committee on Science, Space, and 

Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Edie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member 

House Committee on Science, Space, and 

Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Ami Bera 

Ranking Member 

Subcommittee on Space 

House Committee on Science, Space, and 

Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Re: American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 2017 

Dear Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson, Chairman Babin and Ranking 

Member Bera, 

The Satellite Industry Association1 (SIA) respectfully requests this letter be entered into 

the record for the full committee mark-up of the American Space Commerce Free 

Enterprise Act of 2017 on June 8, 2017 with relevance to Chapter 802- Permitting of 

Space-Based Remote Sensing Systems2• 

1 SIA Executive Members include: The Boeing Company; AT & T Services, Inc.; EchoStar 

Corporation; Intelsat S.A.; Iridium Communications Inc.; Kratos Defense & Security Solutions; 

Ligado Networks; Lockheed Martin Corporation; Northrop Grumman Corporation; One Web; 

SES Americom, Inc.; Space Exploration Technologies Corp.; SSL; and ViaSat, Inc. SIA Associate 

Members include: ABS US Corp.; Artel, LLC; Blue Origin; DataPath, Inc; DigitalGlobe Inc.; DRS 

Technologies, Inc.; Eutelsat America Corp.; Global Eagle Entertainment; Glowlink 

Communications Technology, Inc.; Hughes; Inmarsat, Inc.; Kymeta Corporation; L-3 Electron 

Technologies, Inc.; 03b Limited; Panasonic Avionics Corporation; Planet; Semper Fortis 

Solutions; Spire Global Inc.; TeleCommunication Systems, Inc.; Telesat Canada; TrustComm, 

Inc.; Ultisat, Inc.; and XTAR, LLC. 2 This letter reflects comments of SIA to section 802 only. SIA and its members may have 

additional views on the legislation to be provided separately. SIA also recognizes and agrees 
127 

The United States is clearly a leader in commercial satellite remote sensing in terms of 

technology, innovation, bringing new capabilities to market, and leveraging remote 

sensing data to solve challenging problems. However, regulating it requires a 

fundamental shift in approach as commercial remote sensing platforms evolve into 

digital information services in a more competitive international landscape. This shift in 

regulation must ensure greater predictability, transparency, and accountability for the 

U.S. commercial remote sensing industry to thrive. 

On May 12th, 2017, SIA sent a letter to Chairman Babin and Ranking Member Bera 

thanking them for their support of the satellite industry and a productive round table 

discussion on March 15th, 2017 that addressed the needs, challenges, and opportunities 

for reforming the U.S. commercial remote sensing regulatory regime. SIA outlined 

further specifics that would help to achieve this fundamental shift in regulating the 

industry and we are pleased to see many of those elements incorporated into the draft 

legislation. 

In particular, we support much of the draft legislation addressing commercial remote 

sensing, and its general goals: 

• Recognizing that the commercial remote sensing industry brings benefit to 

security and economic growth; 

• Clarifying that technology not capable of imaging the earth is not subject to 

licensing requirements; 

• Reorganizing the commercial remote sensing regulatory responsibilities within 

the Department of Commerce to a level commensurate with the importance and 

potential of this sector for the United States; 

• Introducing regulatory transparency for stakeholders; 

• Eliminating the possibility of de facto vetoes of a pending application; 

2 

Giving clear authority to Department of Commerce to consult, as necessary, with 

other Departments and Agencies; 

• Establishing a decreased review time with a presumption of approval for license 

applications to be more responsive to business opportunities, and, further, 

assures that the Department of Commerce can be held accountable to 

congressionally-established review periods for license applications; and 

• Prohibiting the Department of Commerce from instituting retroactive changes to 

operational licenses that have immediate and irreversibly negative impact on 

with the exemption of this legislation of commercial space stations licensed by the Federal 

Communications Commission. 

Satellite Industry Association -1200 18th Street, N.W., Suite 1001, Washington, D.C. 20036 

Tel: +1 202 503-1560 Email: info@sia.org SIA Website: http://www.sia.org 
128 

3 

established, and/ or long-standing technical and business operations of licensees, 

especially when or if other methods are available to the United States 

government to achieve the same ends to protect national security. 

SIA strongly supports these goals addressed in the draft legislation; we applaud the 

sponsors of this bill and the Committee's leadership for their efforts to date to advance 

reform of the commercial remote sensing regulatory regime. SIA believes that 

introducing greater transparency and discipline into the U.S. Government's regulatory 

review processes will ultimately encourage industry growth and bring a multitude of 

benefits to the U.S. economy and security. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Tom Stroup 

President 

Satellite Industry Association 

Satellite Industry Ass<K:iation- 1200 18'" Street, N.W., Suite 1001, Washington. D.C. 20036 

Tel: + 1 202 503-1560 Email: info@sia.org SIA Website: htt;p:// www.sia.org 
129 

Spaceport Strategies 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chainnan 

Committee on Sc:ience, Space, and Technology 

U nitod States House of Representatives 

2409 Rayburn House Office Building 

WashingtOn, DC 20SIS 

Dear Chainnan Smith and Ranking Member Johnson: 

June 7, 2017 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member 

LLC 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

United States House of Representatives 

2468 Rayburn House Office Building 

WashingtOn, DC 20515 

I am writing to express my strong support of the Committee on Sc:ience, Space and Technology's 

markup of the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act (ASCFEA), as introduced by Chairman 

Smith, Chainnan Babin, and Representative Bridenstine. 

This legislation makes clear that the Committee has given great thought to a long view of how to 

best enable American industry and entrepreneurs to pursue space commerce activities aimed at exploring, 

developing. and utilizing space resources. 

It is especially encouraging for its "light touchn approach, and the explicit limitations on U.S. 

Government actions that would delay or inhibit U.S. companies from pursuing space commerce 

activities. Having been engaged in both the Government and private industry commercial space policy 

deliberations over the past 30 years, I believe the Committee's policy and regulatol)' approach is coming 

at just the right time to help ensure our nation has the most competitive posture to opening the space 

frontier for economic benefit. 

There continues to be much discussion within the space community about many aspects of how to 

best organize Government functions to keep pace with rapidly evolving private sector capabilities and 

innovation. But the Committee is correctly focusing on what is needed now to best ensure non-traditional 

space activities are able to flourish, and is to be commended for moving forward with this initiative to 

provide a predictable investment and operations environment for exciting new commercial space ventures 

which promise to reach to the Moon and beyond. 

Designation of the Secretary of Commerce and an Assistant Secretal)'-level Office of Space 

Commerce is a reasonable and effective solution to addressing the administrative requirements for 

international treaty compliance without intrusive, burdensome impacts on the industry. It is important that 

there be a bright line of responsibilities between the U.S. Department of Transportation- whose role is to 

promote, foster, and enable commercial space transportation -and an expanded role for Department of 

Commerce to promote, foster, and enable space commerce in utilizing in-space resources by 

administering the requisite U.S. Government registration of non-governmental activities in space to 

pursue that utilization while ensuring compliance with treaty obligations. 

I formed my consulting company after many years in both Government and industry, a career 

still dedicated to advancing both U.S. commercial space transportation capabilities and commercial uses 

of space resources. 

Spaceport Strategies UC P.O. Box 10052, Titusville, FL 32783 
130 

Back in the middle 1980s, the nation's commercial space policy was just beginning to take shape, 

and then, as now, there was considerable discussion about what agencies should have which roles in 

promoting, encouraging, fostering, and, when necessary, regulating the activities of private entities and 

commercial providers. The Department of Transportation, Department of Commerce, and NASA all had 

a role to play, and as you've recognized, they still do. 

The commercial space industry - both its transportation component and its resource utilization 

component- are no longer in infancy. I commend the Committee leadership, and its staff, for engaging 

the commercial space industry and considering the many inputs and recommendations you have received 

as you move into lllllrl!;up. 

Thanks for your hard work, your thoughtful perspective on how U.S. leadership and interests in 

space can be best achieved, and for the courage to take bold steps to ensure our nation will be second to 

none in punuing the exploration of space and the utilization of its resources to improve lives on earth 

~~~~-d 

1 Ji Ball, President 

[ / paceport Strategies LLC 

Spaceport Strategies LLC P.O. Box 10052, Titusville, FL 32783 
131 

Committee on Space, Science and Technology 

US House of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith, 

June 7, 2017 

Thank you for marking up the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act oflQ!l in the 

Committee on Science, Space and Technology. Space Environment Technologies (SET) is in 

strong support of the bi-partisan efforts in the development of this bill and we support efforts to 

bring it before the House of Representatives as soon as possible. 

The Act has a number of important provisions, most important is that the proposed legislation 

will simplify and strengthen the outdated space-based remote sensing regulatory system. Equally 

important is that the Act will enhance U.S. compliance with international obligations, will serve 

to improve national security and eliminates cumbersome regulatory barriers facing new and innovative space technology companies. 

We support the creation of a single authority for registration of nongovernmental space activities 

located at the Department of Commerce Office of Space Commerce; as well as, maintaining our 

international obligations to the Outer Space Treaty and recognizing any safety risks posed to our 

existing federal space systems. 

Space Environment Technologies is the leading U.S. commercial organization providing space 

weather services and products. We operationally support the USAF Joint Space Operations Center (JSpOC) at Vandenberg AFB with hourly forecasts of solar and geomagnetic indices for updating the NORAD satellite catalog for all space objects. SET has also developed and is deploying the first capability for monitoring, in real-time, the radiation environment at aircraft altitudes 

to manage the risk form large solar particle events and their associated hazards to crew and avionics health. 

Space Environment Technologies is also a proud member of the American Commercial Space 

Weather Association (ACSW A), an association dedicated to improving America's competitive 

edge in space. 

1 thank you and the co-sponsors for your leadership on this important issue. 

Sincerely, 

w. ~L;Crvl_ W. Kent Tobiska 

President 

Space Environment Technologies 

CC: U.S. Rep. Brian Babin and U.S. Rep. Jim Bridenstine 

1676 Palisades Dr., Paciflc Palisades, CA 90272-2111 • 310..573-4185 (phone) • 31D-454-9665 (1ax) • http1/SpaceWx.com 
132 

8 June 2017 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chainnan 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

United States House of Representatives 

2409 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

lhe Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

United States House of Representatives 

2468 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson: 

Space Florida supports the Committee on Science, Space and Technology's markup ofH.R. 2809, the 

American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act (ASCFEA), introduced by Chainnan Smith, Chairman 

Babin, and Representative Bridenstine. 

The State of Florida is home to the world's busiest spaceport. This year, more than 30 launches are 

manifested, and the Cape Canaveral Spaceport is actively preparing for a significantly increased launch 

cadence in the coming years. In addition, a number of emerging space actors have set up shop in the 

Sunshine State, with exciting plans to pursue space commerce activities aimed at exploring, developing, 

and utilizing space resources. This bill creates a transparent and predicable approval process for existing 

and emerging in-space activities, which will provide space actors the certainty needed to attract capital, 

obtain licenses, and ultimately, launch to and operate in space. 

Space Florida is very encouraged by the bill's "light touch" approach, and by the explicit limitations on 

U.S. Government actions that would delay or inhibit U.S. companies from pursuing space commerce 

activities. We believe this initiative will help ensure that the United States has the most competitive and 

proactive approach to opening the space frontier for economic benefit. 

The designation of the Secretary of Commerce and an Assistant Secretary-level Office of Space 

Commerce is a reasonable and effective solution to addressing the administrative requirements for 

international treaty compliance. We believe the proposed approach will promdte U.S. private sector 

activities in space without compromising treaty commitments intended to protect the outer space 

environment and celestial bodies. 

While we commend the Committee for its timely approach regarding commercial on-orbit operations, 

Space Florida strongly supports a parallel elevation of an Assistant Secretary within the Department of 

Transportation to promote and, as necessary, regulate, commercial space transportation. This would 

elevate and highlight the USDOT role and responsibility in promoting and enabling the U.S. space 

transportation infrastructure and the commercial space transportation industry as an integral element of 

the nation's transportation system, recognizing its growing importance to the nation's economic and 

1 
133 

security interests on a par with other modes of transportation such as aviation, highways, and maritime 

transportation. 

We are eager to work in the future with the Committee on the development of those policies which will 

be administered by both Transportation and Commerce, but we remain encouraged that the proposed 

legislation under review at present provides an effective formal: for execution. 

Space Florida commends the Committee's leadership and support for the sustained growth of the 

commercial space industry and greatly appreciates the opportunity to discuss and provide feedback on this 

impactful piece of legislation. 

Sincerely, 

d:-..!'~ Chief Officer Officer 

Space Florida 

sf 175-jp-jk 

2 
134 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chair, House Committee on Science, 

Space & Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

June 8, 2017 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member, House Committee on 

Science, Space & Technology 

394 Ford House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson: 

We are writing to convey our strong support for the "American Space Commerce Free 

Enterprise Act of 2017" (ASCFEA), and our organizations want to commend all the parties 

involved in the development of the bill. 

The existing status quo is no longer fit for the modern space industry. New companies 

looking to compete in the large remote sensing market struggle with cumbersome regulations that 

are out of date and place an undue barrier to entry. The lack of a single, well-defined body of 

authority responsible for certification, authorization, and supervision of non-governmental space 

activities creates undue complexity. With this challenging regulatory environment and Jack of 

clear lines of authority, our nation's emerging newspace industry is disadvantaged in the global 

competitive landscape. 

Given that enabling both space development and space settlement are vital to the strategic 

future of the United States, we need a solution that ensures we will not only continue to meet our 

obligations under the Outer Space Treaty, but also encourages and enables new non-governmental 

space activities to be pursued. Therefore, we are glad to see long-standing issues related to 

commercial remote sensing licenses are being addressed, and that a transparent, timely, and 

appealable regulatory process would be available for new non-traditional space activities upon 

passage of this bill. 

We want to thank the Chairman Smith, Chairman Babin, and Congressman Bridenstine, 

and their staffs, for all the work that went into this bill. Finally, we want to encourage all parties 

to remember that the surest way to derive benefits from space is by positioning the United States 

to enable space development and space settlement on issues such as these, and we look forward to 

working with you and your offices on these and other matters related to space. 

Sincerely, 

Andrew Newman, 

Chairman, Students for the Exploration and Development of Space 

Josh Guild 

Interim Executive Director, Space Frontier Foundation 
135 

June 6, 2017 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chairman 

House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member 

House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson, 

Thank you for your work on the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act (ASCFEA). As 

leaders in the U.S. commercial remote sensing satellite industry, we appreciate the attention that has 

been given to this important issue, and the willingness to reform an outdated regulatory 

process. Collectively, we want to express our support for the Remote Sensing provisions of the 

Act We believe that were they to become law these provisions will help to ensure that US. 

companies are able to stay at the cutting edge of technology and maintain international leadership. 

1n the nearly three decades since it's commercialization, remote sensing has become a critical part of 

everyday life. From something as simple as finding the nearest coffee ahop to ensuring first 

responders have the most accurate up to date information, to military appllcations and human 

rights, remote sensing contributes to our location-enabled lives in every way. This is why it is so 

important that rules and regulations support and not hinder industry's ability to innovate and grow. 

We believe this bill will do just that by presuming approval, redefining what needs to be regulated, 

streamlining the permitting process with actionable deadlines, increasing transparency and 

establishing an Assistant Secretary of Space Commerce. The passage is absolutely necessary to U.S. 

industry and we hope to see full bipartisan support 

Again, thank you for your work on this bill and for your support of our industry. We greatly 

appreciate the efforts. 

Sincerely, 

~~/· 

Jnathan Rosenblatt 

General Counsel 

Spire Global, Inc. 

~ Co-Pounder &: Chief Strategy Officer 

Planet Labs, lnc. 

1ffp 

Senior Vice President 

Government Relations & Public Policy 

DigitalGlobe, Inc. 
136 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chair, House Committee on Science, 

Space & Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

1727 15th Street NW 

Suite 800 

Washington, DC 20005 

7 June 2017 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member, House Committee on 

Science, Space & Technology 

394 Ford House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson: 

I am writing on behalf of the 70+ companies and organization in strong support of 

the Committee on Science, Space and Technology's markup of the American Space 

Commerce Free Enterprise Act (ASCFEA), as introduced by Chairman Smith, Chairman 

Babin, and Representative Bridenstine. This legislation clearly reflects the Committee's 

continued bipartisan support for America's commercial space industry, and we endorse it 

being reported favorably to the House of Representatives for further consideration. 

Specifically, the member companies and institutions of the Commercial 

Spaceflight Federation are in strong agreement with all of the goals and most of the key 

elements of your legislation: 

Significant reform of the Commerce Department's obsolete, burdensome, and 

dysfunctional regime for licensing commercial remote sensing satellites is 

especially welcome. While the hardworking staff of the Office of 

Commercial Remote Sensing Regulatory Affairs inside NOAA do their best to 

administer an out-of-date law and unworkable regulations, this legislation's 

wholesale revision of current law and elevating this responsibility up to a 

revitalized Office of Space Commerce in the Office of the Secretary will help 

the U.S. remote sensing industry realize its full job-creating potential. 

ASCFEA's other goal is to formally address the U.S. government's 

obligations under Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty to authorize and 

supervise "non-traditional" commercial space activities. This legislation 

creates a clear, objective, transparent, timely and appealable process for 

American companies to pursue innovative space goods and services beyond 

telecommunications, remote sensing, and space transportation. 
137 

CSF commends the Committee's inclusion of a specific funding authorization 

for the Office of Space Commerce to handle this expanded responsibility, 

because inadequate funding and staffing of other federal space regulatory 

functions (e.g. FAA/AST and NOAA/OCRSRA) has been a continuing 

challenge to industry advancement and growth. 

CSF supports the creation of a new Private Space Activity Advisory 

Committee that will help the Secretary of Commerce and a new Assistant 

Secretary for Commercial Space carry out their responsibilities under this 

legislation and report to Congress annually on progress and issues relating to 

U.S. private sector space activities and the federal government's authorization 

and supervision thereof. CSF will actively help Congress and the Department 

fully utilize this external review mechanism to improve federal oversight and 

streamlined regulation of private sector space activity. 

CSF and its members will continue to engage with the Committee, the rest of 

Congress, and other federal stakeholders as this bill continues on the legislative process. 

In this manner we would like to highlight two remaining topics for which we would like 

to work with the Committee and Congress to resolve: 

There is a strong consensus among the membership that the use and 

definition of "certification" to describe the approval of a new commercial 

space activity is problematic, because it has many other associations in the 

aerospace industry which are not appropriate for the "light touch" regime 

you are pursuing. 

The choice of the Department of Commerce, specifically the Office of 

Space Commerce, as the location of the new authorization and supervision 

responsibility under Section 3 of the bill. 

Again, thanks to you, Chairman Babin, Representative Bridenstine, and all of 

your staffs for developing this important legislation, and for giving the members of the 

Commercial Spaceflight Federation continuing opportunities to discuss, ask questions, 

and provide feedback on the key aspects of the bill. We commend your continuing 

leadership and support for the U.S. commercial space industry, and wish you a successful 

markup tomorrow. 

Sincerely, 

Eric W. Stallmer 

President 

Commercial Spaceflight Federation 
138 

CC: 

The Honorable Kevin McCarthy 

The Honorable Brian Babin 

The Honorable Jim Bridenstine 

The Honorable Ami Bera 

The Honorable Ed Perlmutter 

The Honorable Derek Kilmer 
139 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chairman, House Committee on Science, Space and Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington DC, 20515 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Rankins Member, House Committee on Science, Space and Technology 

394 Ford House Office Building 

Washington DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson: 

June8,2017 

I am writing in support of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology's markup of the American 

Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act (ASCFEA), as Introduced by Chairman Smith, Chairman Babin, and 

Representative Bridenstine. This legislation clearly reflects the Committee's continued bipartisan 

support for America's commercial space Industry. I endorse it being reported favorably to the House of 

Representatives for further consideration. 

cc. Tom Hammond; TI!fanll Woolfolk 
140 

Space Subcommittee Chairman Brian Babin and Representative 

Jim Bridenstine are coauthors and original cosponsors of the bill. 

They both have worked diligently for several years to advance this 

legislation. I’m glad to have Representative Perlmutter and former 

Science Committee Member Derek Kilmer as original co-sponsors 

as well. It speaks to the hard work of all Committee Members and 

staff in developing this common sense, bipartisan, regulatory reform bill. 

This transformative groundbreaking legislation declares in word 

and intent that America is open for business in space. I strongly 

recommend this bill and urge my colleagues to support it. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

Good afternoon. Today we mark-up H.R. 2809, the American Space Commerce 

Free Enterprise Act of 2017. 

H.R. 2809 establishes a legal and policy environment intended to unleash American free enterprise and business, assure conformity with Outer Space Treaty obligations, and ensure that the United States will lead the world in commercial space 

activities throughout the 21st century. 

This bill will promote investment and innovation, resulting in the creation of new 

high paying and high value jobs across the country. 

It will increase American competitiveness and attract companies, talent, and 

money that otherwise would have gone to other countries. It ensures America and 

its workforce will benefit from the new space economy. 

The problem this bill seeks to address is the kind of legal uncertainty that arose 

after Bigelow Aerospace and Moon Express sought payload approval from the Department of Transportation for its non-traditional space activities. 

The payload review and approval process is meant to prevent launches of payloads that jeopardize American interests and safety. It is not designed to satisfy the 

State Department’s concerns about complying with Article VI of the Outer Space 

Treaty. 

Under the Treaty, signatories are to authorize and provide continuing supervision 

of their country’s non-governmental space activities. In the case of Bigelow and 

Moon Express, the Executive Branch stated that it would not be able to assure the 

public that new and innovative space activities would be approved for launch in the 

future. 

The goal of this bill is not to regulate space broadly or to address all of the possible future challenges that the private sector will face in outer space. Doing so 

would be premature and likely stifle innovation and investment. 

Instead, the bill takes a common sense approach by establishing a legal foundation upon which U.S. industry can flourish. 

It establishes a transparent U.S. authorization and supervision certification process for non-governmental space activities that provides regulatory certainty for the 

U.S. commercial space sector. It assures compliance with United States Outer Space 

treaty obligations and addresses national security concerns in the least burdensome 

manner possible. 

The bill includes a provision that consolidates at the Department of Commerce’s 

Office of Space Commerce existing regulatory authority spread across three different 

federal agencies. America gets a ‘‘one-stop shop’’ for authorizing activities that will 

take place in outer space. 

It also streamlines remote sensing regulations to ensure that United States national security is addressed not by holding America’s space industry back, but by 

empowering it to lead the world. 

Absent this bill, American industry would continue to face legal uncertainty. Innovation would be subject to a burdensome and open-ended regulatory process, with 

no assurance of Outer Space Treaty compliance. 

An initial draft of the legislation before us now was publicly presented over a 

month ago for any and all input. We have spent the past month meeting, listening, 

and considering specific, detailed comments from outside stakeholders, interested 

federal agencies, the Administration, and our Committee colleagues including those 

from the minority side of this Committee. Many if not most of their recommendations and requested changes have been included. 

Over the past few days, we have received letters and statements of support for 

the bill from the following entities: 
141 

AgileAero, Inc. 

Atmospheric and Environmental Research 

Atmospheric & Space Technology Research 

Axiom Space, LLC 

Bigelow Aerospace, LLC 

Blue Origin 

Carmel Research Center, Inc. 

The Commercial Spaceflight Federation 

Digital Globe, Inc. 

GeoOptics 

Moon Express Inc. 

Panasonic 

Planet Labs, Inc. 

Satellite Industry Association 

Space Frontier Foundation 

Spaceport Strategies, LLC 

Spire Global, Inc. 

Space Environment Technologies 

SpaceX 

Students for the Exploration and Development of Space, and TechFreedom 

Without objection, the letters we have received will be included in the record. I 

want to thank these groups for their support of the bill. 

Space Subcommittee Chairman Brian Babin and Representative Jim Bridenstine 

are co-authors and original co-sponsors of the bill. They both have worked diligently 

for several years to advance this legislation. 

I’m glad to have Representative Perlmutter and former Science Committee member Derek Kilmer as original co-sponsors as well. It speaks to the hard work of all 

Committee members and staff in developing this common sense, bipartisan, regulatory reform bill. 

This transformative groundbreaking legislation declares in word and intent that 

America is ‘‘open for business’’ in space. I strongly recommend this bill and urge my 

colleagues to support it. 

Chairman SMITH. That concludes my opening statement, and 

Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson, the 

Ranking Member, is recognized for hers. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank you 

for holding today’s markup of H.R. 2809, the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 2017. I want to also thank you for delaying it so that we could attempt to work together. That is much 

appreciated. 

The issues that this bill attempts to address are important and 

need to be addressed. Unfortunately, I think the solutions provided 

in H.R. 2809 may cause more problems than they solve. For this 

reason, I cannot support the bill in its current form. I think there 

is a bipartisan agreement concerning the problems being addressed 

at today’s markup. 

There is a regulatory gap in our current structure of oversight 

over commercial space activities. We currently regulate launch and 

reentry activities, Earth imaging, and space communications, but 

other in-orbit or deep-space operations are essentially unregulated. 

I think it is widely acknowledged that these orbital activities need 

to be more closely overseen, especially as the problems of space debris have increased. 

The other problem addressed by H.R. 2809 is in the area of commercial remote sensing. Again, I think there is bipartisan agreement that this subject needs to be addressed. U.S. companies are 

increasingly at a competitive disadvantage versus their foreign 

competitors due to the current regulatory and oversight situation 

in the United States in the area of commercial remote sensing. 
142 

Clearly, something needs to be done here to align our oversight 

system to the realities of the global marketplace. 

Unfortunately, the approach the Majority has taken with H.R. 

2809 may cause more problems than it fixes. For instance, instead 

of housing space regulatory authority at an agency with existing 

expertise and existing space regulatory activities, H.R. 2809 would 

essentially create an entirely new bureaucracy to implement this 

law. The office that this bill assigns these responsibilities to has a 

total of three full-time employees right now. This makes no sense 

to me, and it makes no sense to many in the stakeholder community. 

We have an existing space regulatory body, created by the 

Science Committee, and housed at the Department of Transportation, which has the base of expertise to implement this law. I 

think it makes much more sense to place these new responsibilities 

within this existing office rather than to create an entirely new and 

different regulatory body in a different Department of the government. 

Likewise, with regard to commercial remote sensing, this bill 

takes an unnecessarily expansive approach to addressing the problem. The underlying bill would make the Secretary of Commerce 

the judge, jury, and executioner with regard to national security 

issues raised in the commercial remote sensing regulatory process. 

This is a dramatic turn away from the interagency process that has 

historically been used to address national security issues in space. 

Again, instead of improving the process for commercial remote 

sensing, this bill blows up that process. I think a more incremental 

improvement to the process would be more constructive. And I 

think we should acknowledge the reality that the approach this bill 

takes with regard to national security issues and international obligations will likely doom any chance for enactment of this legislation. 

There are numerous other issues, both large and small, with this 

legislation. Many of these issues have been pointed out by the 

stakeholder community both in government and industry. I think 

if those stakeholders had been consulted prior to drafting this legislation, rather than as an afterthought, we could have avoided these 

problems entirely. 

We have good staff here on the Committee. For instance, my 

aerospace staff have over 100 years of combined experience working on these issues in government, industry, and NGO’s. Nonetheless, even with their wealth of experience and expertise, I wouldn’t 

want them to craft complex legislation without first consulting the 

full cross-section of the affected stakeholder community. The result 

of not consulting with that stakeholder community from the outset 

is that we have a bill before us today that is needlessly complex, 

unsupported by broad swaths of the government and industry, and 

very unlikely to be enacted into law. 

Mr. Chairman, I applaud your efforts to address two very real 

problems with our commercial space regulatory regime. However, 

I think we’d be better served by hitting the reset button on this 

legislation. 

I thank you, and I yield back. 
143 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you Chairman Smith. And I want to thank you for holding today’s markup 

of H.R. 2809, the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 2017. The issues 

that this bill attempts to address are important and need to be addressed. Unfortunately, I think the solutions provided in H.R. 2809 may cause more problems than 

they solve. For this reason, I cannot support the bill in its current form. 

I think there is a bipartisan agreement concerning the problems being addressed 

at today’s markup. There is a regulatory gap in our current structure of oversight 

over commercial space activities. 

We currently regulate launch and reentry activities, earth imaging, and space 

communications, but other in-orbit or deep space operations are essentially unregulated. I think it is widely acknowledged that these orbital activities need to be more 

closely overseen, especially as the problems of space debris have increased. 

The other problem addressed by H.R. 2809 is in the area of commercial remote 

sensing. Again, I think there is bipartisan agreement that this subject needs to be 

addressed. U.S. companies are increasingly at a competitive disadvantage versus 

their foreign competitors due to the current regulatory and oversight situation in 

the United States in the area of commercial remote sensing. Clearly, something 

needs to be done here to align our oversight system to the realities of the global 

marketplace. 

Unfortunately, the approach the Majority has taken with H.R. 2809 may cause 

more problems than it will fix. 

For instance, instead of housing space regulatory authority at an agency with existing expertise and existing space regulatory activities, H.R. 2809 would essentially 

create an entirely new bureaucracy to implement this law. The office that this bill 

assigns these responsibilities to has a total of three full time employees right now. 

This makes no sense to me, and it makes no sense to many in the stakeholder community. We have an existing space regulatory body, created by the Science Committee, and housed at the Department of Transportation, which has the base of expertise to implement this law. I think it makes much more sense to place these new 

responsibilities within this existing office rather than to create an entirely new and 

different regulatory body in a different Department of the government. 

Likewise, with regard to commercial remote sensing, this bill takes an unnecessarily expansive approach to addressing the problem. 

The underlying bill would make the Secretary of Commerce the judge, jury, and 

executioner with regard to national security issues raised in the commercial remote 

sensing regulatory process. This is a dramatic turn away from the interagency process that has historically been used to address national security issues in space. 

Again, instead of improving the process for commercial remote sensing, this bill 

blows up that process. I think a more incremental improvement to the process 

would be more constructive. And I think we should acknowledge the reality that the 

approach this bill takes with regard to national security issues and international obligations will likely doom any chance for enactment of this legislation. 

There are numerous other issues, both large and small, with this legislation. 

Many of these issues have been pointed out by the stakeholder community both in 

government and industry. I think if those stakeholders had been consulted prior to 

drafting this legislation, rather than as an afterthought, we could have avoided 

these problems entirely. We have good staff here on the Committee. For instance, 

my aerospace staff have over 100 years of combined experience working on these 

issues in government, industry, and NGOs. Nonetheless, even with their wealth of 

experience and expertise, I wouldn’t want them to craft complex legislation without 

first consulting the full cross-section of the affected stakeholder community. The result of not consulting with that stakeholder community from the outset is that we 

have a bill before us today that is needlessly complex, unsupported by broad swaths 

of government and industry, and very unlikely to be enacted into law. 

Mr. Chairman, I applaud your efforts to address two very real problems with our 

commercial space regulatory regime. 

However, I think we would be better served by hitting the reset button on this 

legislation. 

Thank you, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

The Chairman of the Space Subcommittee, the gentleman from 

Texas, Mr. Babin, is recognized for an opening statement. 

Mr. BABIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. Good 

morning—or good afternoon. 
144 

I want to say that I strongly support H.R. 2809, the American 

Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 2017. I am grateful to have 

worked with Chairman Smith and Representative Bridenstine in 

the development of this bill. I am also very glad that this is a bipartisan bill, with the support of Representatives Perlmutter and 

Kilmer. 

The American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act is a commonsense bipartisan bill that streamlines regulatory processes, limits 

burdensome government intrusion, promotes American innovation 

and investment, protects national security, and satisfies our international obligations. 

One of the fundamental drivers for this legislation has been that 

innovative American companies are pushing the boundaries. When 

the Senate ratified the Outer Space Treaty 50 years ago, free enterprise in outer space was an idea, but not yet a reality. Today, not 

only does the U.S. free enterprise exist in outer space, it is innovating at an unprecedented pace. From asteroid mining, to private 

moon missions, to satellite servicing, to remote sensing constellations, there is great promise that American enterprise will soon 

unlock new wealth and scientific benefits. 

But this promise is threatened, threatened by expansive unchecked regulatory authority, cumbersome non-transparent regulatory processes, and misperceptions about United States Outer 

Space Treaty obligations. 

For several years, the Space Subcommittee has heard concerns 

from our stakeholders that they need greater regulatory certainty 

to attract investment and to succeed. Stakeholders also reported 

that while they want to stay in America, due to regulatory burdens 

and uncertainty, they might need to go overseas. 

The American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act addresses 

these concerns without compromising our cherished principles of 

liberty. It provides for presumptions of approval and requires the 

government to take affirmative steps before conditioning or denying proposed space or remote sensing operations. It places the burden of demonstrating inconsistency with Outer Space Treaty obligations and national security requirements of the United States 

with the government and not with the applicant. It curtails vague, 

overreaching regulatory authority and prevents tolling of statutory 

adjudication timelines. It ensures U.S. industry receives a timely 

and transparent determination on applications. 

The bill recognizes legitimate national security equities and provides for the condition or denial of authorized space activities with 

remote sensing systems that are a significant threat to U.S. national security in certain circumstances. But it protects against 

abuses of interagency discretion by requiring an explanation and 

evidence of the threat before conditions or denial can be made. 

In order to ensure the Office of Space Commerce is empowered 

to represent the interests of our citizens and the private sector, the 

Director of the Office of Space Commerce is elevated to be the Assistant Secretary for Space Commerce. 

The Act also advances important public policy interests. The bill 

establishes a mandatory safety consultation between private and 

Federal Government operators. The goal of this consultation is for 

the affected parties to reach a voluntary agreement to mitigate 
145 

safety risks. For parties subject to U.S. jurisdiction, the Act provides for Federal district court jurisdiction for any civil action resulting from certified or permitted space operations. 

To protect against foreign harmful interference, the Act directs 

the President to protect against acts of foreign aggression and foreign harmful interference. The Act also addresses concerns of 

harmful contamination of the Earth or of celestial bodies. Pursuant 

to our international obligations under the Outer Space Treaty, operations may be conditioned or denied by the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with appropriate agencies, such as NASA to 

address harmful contamination. 

The bill posits longstanding United States policy, confirmed by 

both Department of State and NASA, that COSPAR planetary protection guidelines are not international obligations of the United 

States. This was done to allow all stakeholders, including the scientific community and industry, to work together as activities expand beyond scientific exploration and use, to address mutual interests, not by proscribing COSPAR guidelines as binding international law, but by allowing the Outer Space Treaty to guide our 

activities. 

I strongly support this bill and urge my colleagues to do the 

same, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. BABIN

Good afternoon. I strongly support H.R. 2809, the American Space Commerce Free 

Enterprise Act of 2017. I am grateful to have worked with Chairman Smith and Representative 

Bridenstine in the development of this bill. I am also very glad that this is a bipartisan bill, with the support of Representatives Perlmutter and Kilmer. 

The American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act is a common-sense bipartisan 

bill that streamlines regulatory processes, limits burdensome government intrusion, 

promotes American innovation and investment, protects national security, and satisfies our international obligations. 

One of the fundamental drivers for this legislation has been that innovative 

American companies are pushing the boundaries. 

When the Senate ratified the Outer Space Treaty fifty years ago, free enterprise 

in outer space was an idea, but not yet a reality. 

Today, not only does U.S. free enterprise exist in outer space, it is innovating at 

an unprecedented pace. From asteroid mining, to private moon missions, to satellite 

servicing, to remote sensing constellations, there is great promise that American enterprise will soon unlock new wealth and scientific benefits. 

But this promise is threatened. Threatened by expansive unchecked regulatory 

authority, cumbersome non-transparent regulatory processes, and misperceptions 

about United States Outer Space Treaty obligations. 

For several years, the Space Subcommittee has heard concerns from stakeholders 

that they need greater regulatory certainty to attract investment and succeed. 

Stakeholders also reported that while they want to stay in America, due to regulatory burdens and uncertainty, they might need to go overseas. 

The American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act addresses these concerns without compromising our cherished principles of liberty. 

It provides for presumptions of approval and requires the government to take affirmative steps before conditioning or denying proposed space or remote sensing operations. 

It places the burden of demonstrating inconsistency with Outer Space Treaty obligations and national security requirements of the United States with the government, not the applicant. 

It curtails vague, overreaching regulatory authority and prevents tolling of statutory adjudication timelines. It ensures U.S. industry receives a timely and transparent determination on applications. 

The bill recognizes legitimate national security equities and provides for the condition or denial of authorized space activities with remote sensing systems that are 

a significant threat to U.S. national security in certain circumstances. But it pro-
146 

tects against abuses of interagency discretion by requiring an explanation and evidence of the threat before conditions or denial can be made. 

In order to ensure the Office of Space Commerce is empowered to represent the 

interests of our citizens and the private sector, the Director of the Office is elevated 

to be the ‘‘Assistant Secretary for Space Commerce.’’ 

The Act also advances important public policy interests. 

The bill establishes a mandatory safety consultation between private and federal 

government operators. The goal of this consultation is for the affected parties to 

reach a voluntary agreement to mitigate safety risks. 

For parties subject to U.S. jurisdiction, the Act provides for Federal district court 

jurisdiction for any civil action resulting from certified or permitted space operations. To protect against foreign harmful interference, the Act directs the President 

to protect against acts of foreign aggression and foreign harmful interference. 

The act also addresses concerns of harmful contamination of the Earth or celestial 

bodies. Pursuant to our international obligations under the Outer Space Treaty, operations may be conditioned or denied by the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with appropriate agencies, such as NASA to address harmful contamination. 

The bill posits long-standing United States policy, confirmed by both Department 

of State and NASA, that COSPAR planetary protection guidelines are not international obligations of the United States. This was done to allow all stakeholders, 

including the scientific community and industry, to work together as activities expand beyond scientific exploration and use, to address mutual interests. Not by proscribing COSPAR guidelines as binding international law, but by allowing the Outer 

Space Treaty to guide our activities. 

I strongly support this bill and urge my colleagues to do the same. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Babin. 

And the gentleman from Oklahoma, one of the principal authors 

of the bill, is recognized for his opening statement. Mr. Bridenstine. 

Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

For several years now, there has been uncertainty around which 

government agency has the responsibility to approve nontraditional 

space activities while ensuring conformity with the Outer Space 

Treaty. This uncertainty has hurt capital formation and innovation. It also sends American companies scrambling overseas to 

countries such as Luxembourg and the United Arab Emirates. This 

is the exact opposite environment we need in this country. 

I have made solving this issue one of my top priorities in Congress, and as the Chairman noted, Bigelow Aerospace and Moon 

Express have been blazing a trail here. Last year, I proposed legislation to provide for an Enhanced Payload Review. The American 

Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act takes from that and builds 

upon much of the consensus we gained around the policies in that 

draft legislation. The American Space Commerce Free Enterprise 

Act provides certainty to industry by granting the ability to approve commercial space activities to a single authority. I want to 

be clear: We need a single authority. In this case, we’ve determined 

that the best case would be the Secretary of Commerce. The Office 

of Space Commerce will be elevated to a more prominent position 

within the Commerce Department and will perform a simple review of proposed operations to check that they are not violating the 

United States’ obligations under the Outer Space Treaty. This 

gives the executive branch the tool it claims that it needs while instituting a clear, known, transparent, and timely process for American industry to prosper. 

There is discretion built into this bill for the Secretary to condition or even deny a certification. I think this is an important piece 

to have from a policy standpoint. However, the onus here to prove 

there is a problem is now going to be on the government. The mes-
147 

sage Congress is trying to send is, as the Chairman said, that 

America is open for business, especially in space. 

However, Congress also recognizes that there are other policies 

and interests of the United States that are affected by private sector space activities, one of them being national security. As a 

former Naval aviator, a current Oklahoma Air National Guardsman, and a Member of the House Armed Services Committee, there 

is nothing more important to me than the national security of the 

United States. I want to be clear: This bill actually improves the 

national security of the United States. 

This is why the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act 

rolls in remote sensing reform. National security interests for the 

foreseeable future will require remote sensing systems, many of 

which are now going to be provided commercially. By requiring a 

national security risk assessment during the remote sensing system permitting process, we are ensuring national security concerns 

are met. This has also provided an opportunity in this bill for us 

to reform the broken system of remote sensing licensing that is 

overly restrictive, thwarts industry, and hands an advantage to foreign competitors. 

As the author of Title II of the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act of 2015, along with my good friend from Colorado, 

Ed Perlmutter, I have been committed to fixing this issue for many 

years. The American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act improves 

the remote sensing permitting process by creating a single decision 

point, increasing transparency of the process, avoiding unnecessary 

reviews of technologies available on the market or that have already been approved, and preventing the interagency process from 

indefinitely delaying decisionmaking. These changes will allow our 

remote sensing industry to once again be the world leader. 

The bill also goes farther than current law to provide for the 

physical safety of U.S. Government assets in orbit. After operations 

are certificated, the government can do an assessment for physical 

safety issues, and a consultation forum will be held to come to a 

solution that can prevent any disastrous collisions and protect the 

safety of government and private assets. 

This bill will engender a growth in commercial space activity 

that we have not yet seen in the United States of America. This 

is a good growth of space activity. But this growth will continue to 

put further stress on the agency responsible for approving 

launches: The FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation. 

Congress needs to be mindful that we must be proactive on that 

office as well, and I have an amendment to begin addressing this 

issue later here in the markup. 

Mr. Chairman, this is a very strong and a very bipartisan bill. 

This is a good place to begin the legislative process as we work 

with the rest of our House colleagues, the Senate, and the Administration to eventually get a solution put into law. 

I want to thank you, Chairman Smith, for all of your hard work 

on this as well as Chairman Babin. We’re sending a clear message 

here today. I’m proud to support the bill, and I look forward to favorably reporting it out of the Science Committee. 

I’d also like to thank a couple of the staffers, Christopher 

Ingraham in my office has been working overtime on this, and Mr. 
148 

Chairman, your staffers, Chris Wydler, Tom Hammond, Mike 

Mineiro, and Shana Dale have been on the phone day in and day 

out for many, many months now, and thank you for allowing them 

to work so hard on this bill. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you. I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. BRIDENSTINE

Mr. Chairman, I am glad we are here today marking up the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act. For several years now, there has been uncertainty around 

what government agency has the responsibility to approve nontraditional space activities while ensuring conformity with the Outer Space Treaty. This uncertainty 

has hurt capital formation and innovation. It also sends American companies scrambling overseas to countries such as Luxembourg or the UAE. This is the exact opposite environment we need in this country. 

I have made solving this issue one of my top priorities in Congress. Last year, 

I proposed legislation to provide for an Enhanced Payload Review. The American 

Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act takes from that and builds upon much of the 

consensus we gained around the policies in that draft legislation. 

The American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act provides certainty to industry 

by granting the ability to approve commercial space activities to a single authority, 

in this case the Secretary of Commerce. The Office of Space Commerce will be elevated to a more prominent position within the Commerce Department and will perform a simple review of proposed operations to check that they are not violating the 

United States’ obligations under the Outer Space Treaty. This gives the executive 

branch the tool it claims needs while instituting a clear, known, transparent, and 

timely process for American industry to prosper. 

There is discretion built into this bill for the Secretary to condition or deny a certification. I think this is important to have from a policy standpoint, however, the 

onus to prove there is a problem is now on the government. The message Congress 

is trying to send is: America is open for business in space. 

However, Congress also recognizes that there are other policies and interests of 

the United States that are affected by private sector space activities, one of them 

being national security. As a former Naval aviator, current Oklahoma Air National 

Guardsman, and member of the House Armed Services Committee, there is nothing 

more important to me than the national security of the United States. This bill improves national security. 

This is why the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act rolls in remote 

sensing reform. National security interests - for the foreseeable future - will be implicated by remote sensing systems, both of the Earth and objects in orbit. By requiring a national security risk assessment during the remote sensing system permitting process, we are ensuring national security concerns are met. 

This has also provided an opportunity in this bill for us to majorly reform the broken system of remote sensing licensing that is overly restrictive, thwarts industry, 

and hands an advantage to foreign competitors. As the author of Title II of the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act of 2015, along with my good friend from 

Colorado Ed Perlmutter, I have been committed to fixing this issue. 

The American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act improves the remote sensing 

permitting process by creating a single decision point, increasing transparency of 

the process, avoiding unnecessary reviews of technologies available on the market 

or that have already been approved, and preventing the interagency process from 

indefinitely delaying decision making. 

These changes will allow our remote sensing industry to once again be the world 

leader. 

The bill also goes farther than current law to provide for the physical safety of 

United States government assets on orbit. After operations are certificated, the government can do an assessment for physical safety issues, and a consultation forum 

will be held to come to a solution that can prevent any disastrous collisions and protect the safety of government and private assets. 

This bill will engender a growth in commercial space activity that we have not 

yet seen. A good growth. But this growth will continue to put further stress on the 

agency responsible for approving launches - FAA/AST. Congress needs to be mindful 

that we must be proactive on that office as well, and I will have an amendment to 

begin addressing this issue later in the mark up. 

All in all Mr. Chairman, this is a very strong and bipartisan bill, which was very 

important for me that we make sure this bill, and space, remained bipartisan. This 

is a good place to begin the legislative process as we work with the rest of our 
149 

House colleagues, the Senate, and the Administration to eventually get a solution 

put into law. 

I want to thank Chairman Smith and Chairman Babin for working with me on 

this, we have been working hand in hand to craft the American Space Commerce 

Free Enterprise Act, and we are sending a clear message that American innovation 

will lead the world. I am proud to support the bill and look forward to favorably 

reporting it out of the Science Committee. 

I’d like to thank the staff for their work on this issue: My staffer Christopher 

Ingraham, and Science Committee staffers Chris Wydler, Tom Hammond, Mike 

Mineiro, and Shana Dale. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Bridenstine. I appreciate the 

compliments directed toward staff and the legislation as well. 

We will now proceed with amendments in the order listed on the 

roster. The first amendment on the roster is a Manger’s Amendment, and the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 2809 offered by Mr. Smith of 

Texas, amendment #012. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read, and I’ll recognize myself in support of the Manager’s Amendment. 

The Manager’s Amendment makes technical corrections and 

minor changes to the bill. Among these, it extends the time the 

Secretary of Commerce has to adjudicate certificate and permit applications from 60 to 90 days. The amendment also says that the 

Secretary of Commerce shall consult as the Secretary considers 

necessary with the heads of other relevant agencies. This change 

was made to ensure that departments and agencies such as NASA, 

the Department of Defense or the Department of State have a way 

to inform Secretary of Commerce determinations on proposed space 

activities. 

However, further modifying the consultation authorities under 

the bill beyond ‘‘shall consult as the Secretary considers necessary’’ 

puts at risk the very purpose of the bill. Additional changes would 

undermine the ability of the Secretary to provide a fair and equitable adjudication of applications and open up the certification and 

permitting processes to excessive interagency control. 

Today, remote sensing systems are subject to a regulatory regime 

where at least three different departments and agencies have the 

authority to condition or deny applications. As a result, licensing 

actions occur months and even years over the 120-day determination timeline required by law. Companies are applying and waiting 

without any understanding as to why NOAA takes so long to get 

back. Stakeholders report significant uncertainty with licensing actions including modifications to operational license conditions without notice or due process. American remote sensing startups want 

to stay in the United States but most plan for overseas operations 

due to the uncertainty in our current regulatory approval process. 

Experience also has taught us that while the Department of 

Transportation retains exclusive authority to make determinations 

for international obligations for laundry and reentry activities, inflexible consultation provisions have in practice become de facto 

concurrence authorities for other departments and agencies. This is 

not to say that the intent of the bill is to undermine the ability of 

the executive branch to appropriately inform the Secretary of Com-
150 

merce about remote sensing applications. On the contrary, the proposed amendment will clearly provide such a process. 

We must also recognize that any major disagreement between 

the Secretary of Commerce and other departments or agencies regarding a proposed operation will be elevated to the White House 

for adjudication. In such interagency environments, if we move the 

needle too far in favor of other agencies, the Secretary of Commerce 

will not be able to represent the interests of the applicant and the 

national interest of free enterprise. 

For all these reasons, I support this amendment, and not only 

ask my colleagues to do the same, but I want to recognize the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter, and give him credit for 

these changes as well. 

Let’s see. If there any further discussion on the amendment? The 

gentleman from Colorado is recognized. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you, and I move to strike the last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I’m here today as a supporter and cosponsor of 

H.R. 2809. The United States currently has the best aerospace industry in the world. In order to stay No. 1, we need to provide it 

certainty so that the industry can attract investment and continue 

innovating to push our country forward. 

We also want to help set the standard for how to regulate space 

activities so there is a level playing field for our American industry. 

That is why we need a certification process as provided in the bill 

to ensure compliance with the Outer Space Treaty. I understand 

there’s still some discussion amongst industry and from involved 

agencies about where this authority should be placed, either within 

the Office of Space Commerce as under the bill or under the Office 

of Space Transportation at the FAA, or maybe someplace else. I 

hope this discussion continues and we reach a consecutive as we 

continue through the legislative process. 

I hope our Committee continues to also have the discussion on 

space traffic management and how to properly protect both U.S. 

Government and other U.S. commercial spacecraft to avoid conflicts 

and costly problems for everyone. 

The second part of the bill, and the Chairman was just referring 

to it, makes important reforms for the remote sensing industry. As 

many of may you know, a major remote sensing company named 

Digital Globe is headquartered in my district in Westminster, Colorado. I’ve heard the stories about how long they’ve waited for a license determination under NOAA: Over 3 years and counting in 

one space. This is well past the 120-day deadline currently required 

in statute because there is no mechanism to enforce any timeline. 

This is why I believe the reforms in section 4 of the bill are overdue 

and are necessary. Those companies in the business, in the remote 

sensing business, need certainty so they can make sound plans and 

attract investors and customers. All of these regulatory delays 

mean lost revenue and significant expenses fighting for approval. 

Section 4 of the bill fixes that. 

I’d like to take a moment and thank Congressmen Smith, Babin 

and Bridenstine for working with me on this bill. I believe they’ve 

made improvements to the text of the bill including specific consultation language, as the Chairman just discussed, which requires 
151 

consultation with other Federal agencies, ensuring proper determinations regarding the Outer Space Treaty, national security, and 

authorizing funding for the Office of Space Commerce. 

I’m grateful the sponsors included two provisions I asked for in 

the Manager’s Amendment. You’re extending the deadlines in the 

bill from 60 days to ensure the Office of Space Commerce has the 

time needed to get its decisions right. Additionally, the amendment 

strengthens the consultation language to require the Secretary of 

Commerce to consult with other relevant Federal agencies as he 

deems necessary when making the determinations. 

For these reasons, I support the bill and I look forward to continuing to improve it as it goes through the process, and I yield 

back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Perlmutter, and the gentleman 

from Texas, the Chairman of the Subcommittee, is recognized for 

a statement as well. 

Mr. BABIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the last 

word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. BABIN. I wish as well to speak in favor of the amendment. 

One of the changes made by this amendment is extending the time 

that the Secretary of Commerce has to adjudicate certificate and 

permit applications from 60 to 90 days. This change is being made 

after discussions with stakeholders and other Members, specifically, the minority. I believe this is a reasonable accommodation 

that would grant the Secretary of Commerce time necessary to 

properly adjudicate applications without overly burdening the applicant. 

However, I caution extending this timeline beyond 90 days. The 

Secretary and the interagency consultation process must be held 

accountable. Without a firm deadline, experience has shown that 

the interagency process can lead to long delays in violation of the 

law. Today, under existing law, remote sensing licenses are required to be adjudicated within 120 days. Reality is that applications have in some cases, as Mr. Perlmutter mentioned, taken 

years in clear violation of the law. We cannot repeat this mistake. 

I also completely agree with the points that Chairman Smith 

made regarding the consultation language in this amendment, and 

while a change in the consultation from ‘‘may’’ to ‘‘shall’’ is a reasonable change to address stakeholder concerns further modifying 

the consultation authorities under the bill beyond ‘‘shall consult as 

the Secretary considers necessary’’ puts at risk the very purpose of 

this bill. 

I support this amendment and I urge my colleagues to do the 

same, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Babin. 

Is there any further discussion on the bill? 

If not, the gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Bridenstine is recognized. 

Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll just be quick. 

I wanted to thank my friend from Colorado, Ed Perlmutter, because he provided a lot of great input, same with my friend from 

California, Mr. Bera, a lot of great input. We have made many efforts to accommodate those changes, and in fact, appreciate Ed for 
152 

not only—Mr. Perlmutter is my enemy. How about that? Does that 

help you in your primary? No, I appreciate his good-faith effort in 

trying to make this a better bill, and I look forward to working 

with him in the future to make it even better. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Bridenstine. 

If there is no further discussion on the amendment, all in favor 

of the Manager’s Amendment say aye. 

All opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

The next amendment on the roster is the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by the Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from Texas, and she is recognized for that purpose. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment 

at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

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

2809, offered by Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas, amendment 

#002. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the Ranking Member is recognized to explain her 

amendment. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you. 

When I first learned that the Chairman wanted to pursue commercial space legislation this spring, I let him know that I wanted 

to work with him to see whether we could develop a bipartisan 

piece of legislation that all Members could support. Majority and 

minority staff tried hard to achieve such a result but ultimately too 

many significant issues still remain to be resolved with this bill 

when today’s markup was noticed. 

As I mentioned in my opening remarks, many concerns were 

raised about the bill’s provisions by NASA, national security agencies, the State Department, and industry stakeholders, among others. In fact, when NASA reviewed the latest version of the bill 

we’re marking up today, the agency identified even more concerns 

than were included in its original set of comments. In short, this 

bill is not a bill that can be fixed with a few amendments at today’s 

market. 

That said, the issues that the bill attempts to address are important ones. I feel an obligation to propose an alternative that can 

address these issues, not just oppose the current bill, and this is 

what my amendment is intended to do. Fortunately, we already 

have a roadmap for much of this work. Congress asked for and received guidance from the Administration last year regarding certification of innovative new space activities. The legislative proposal 

represented a consensus of all the agencies that will need to deal 

with these space systems and ensure they meet our national security and international obligations. Section 3 of my amendment essentially codifies that interagency consensus on mission certification. Among the key features of that consensus approach is a decision to not reinvent the wheel but instead to leverage the competencies that have been built up in FAA’s Office of Commercial 

Space Transportation and utilize existing robust interagency review process. One of the strengths of that interagency process is 

that it can help provide companies and investors the assurance 
153 

that an agency will not try to block their proposed activities at the 

last minute simply because the agency hadn’t had an opportunity 

to review the proposal. As mentioned in my opening statement, 

that needn’t require creating yet another Federal bureaucracy with 

all of the resulting costs and delays that will accompany its creation. 

In essence, the amendment takes a light-touch approach to regulating the emerging non-traditional commercial space systems. 

Rather than requiring page after page of convoluted legislative 

text, the amendment builds on the highly successful FAA space 

launch licensing process and provides a clean, straightforward path 

of certification of these innovative new space systems. 

In addition, section 3 of the amendment is consistent with the 

consensus approach endorsed by the space professionals of the 

agencies that will have to deal with these new systems in marked 

contrast to the bill being marked up today. 

With respect to commercial remote sensing licensing, my amendment again attempts to build on the existing process rather than 

blowing it up and starting over. The amendment proposes a number of reforms that have been urged by the remote sensing industry 

including shortened timetables for application reviews certainty 

that granting a license means that national security and international obligation concerns have been addressed and elevation of 

the remote sensing licensing function at the Commerce Department. 

Equally importantly, it authorizes a significant increase in funding for the office that will be handling these remote sensing licensing applications. It is hard to criticize Commerce for the slowness 

of its licensing operation when Congress has too often failed to provide the resources and staffing the licensing office needs. 

In conclusion, the amendment I’m offering today addresses head 

on the two issues that we are considering today and takes on an 

approach that is limited, allows the oversight of these new systems 

to evolve as we can more experience, and minimizes the cost and 

delays that will inevitably be incurred under the approach taken 

in this base bill. 

However, I really can count. I learned to count over 75 years ago 

in Waco, Texas, and I realize that this amendment has very little 

chance of being adopted. So as I mentioned earlier, I don’t think 

the issues being addressed today are inherently partisan and it is 

my hope that we can continue to work together and find common 

ground to support all aspects of the commercial space industry. In 

that light, I’m going to withdraw my amendment and hope that we 

can continue to work together to reach a consensus on this bill. 

So I ask consent to withdraw the amendment, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn, and I thank the gentlewoman for her comments. 

I’m going to recognize myself in opposition to the amendment. 

Not to go into any great detail as I would have had it not been 

withdrawn, but I do want Members of the Committee on both sides 

of the aisle to recognize a little bit about the efforts we have made 

to try to make this a bipartisan piece of legislation. 

This Committee has worked diligently to ensure that you international obligations and national security interests are met in the 
154 

least burdensome manner possible. On September 7, 2016, the 

Committee held a hearing titled ‘‘Commercial Remote Sensing: Facilitating Ownership and Leadership.’’ On March 8th, 2017, the 

Committee held a hearing on regulating space, innovation, liberty 

and international obligations. We shared a discussion draft of the 

bill before us today with the Minority, stakeholders, and agencies 

more than a month ago. We participated in dozens of bipartisan 

meetings with stakeholders and the Minority. We incorporated dozens of edits that were responsive to all parties. We circulated an 

updated version of the draft bill last week days in advance of what 

is required by Committee rules. The Minority requested 11 specific 

changes to the bill. In the interests of good faith, we accommodated 

as many as we could, a great majority, in fact. 

After making all those accommodations to the Minority, I was 

more than disappointed to see this amendment in the nature of a 

substitute, and while I won’t go into all my objections to the 

amendment, I’ll simply say in general the Ranking Member’s 

amendment would strangle an industry in its early stages with 

burdensome regulations, force companies to relocate overseas, compromise national security, stifle innovation and economic competitiveness, and relegate the United States to a second-rate spacefaring Nation. 

I’ll be happy to share my additional objections with Members, 

but in the interest of time, I’ll simply say that I am a little bit concerned about the ability of this Committee to process bipartisan 

bills if we can’t agree on this piece of legislation that is so widely 

supported by so many interest groups, and after all the efforts we 

made, all the reassurances that we have received, I just hope that 

all individuals of the Committee will make up their own minds and 

reach their own conclusions as to whether they think this is a good 

piece of legislation. 

That concludes my remarks, and we will now go to the third 

amendment to be offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. 

Bridenstine. 

Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Stand by 1 second, Chairman. OK, Mr. Chairman. This bill is intended to engender growth in commercial space 

activity that will be unlike any we have seen. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Oh, yes, I have an amendment at the desk. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 2809 offered by Mr. Bridenstine 

of Oklahoma, amendment #008. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

This bill is intended to engender growth in commercial space activity that will be unlike any we have seen. Granting maximum 

certainty with minimal regulatory burden to non-traditional activities as well as improving the process for more traditional activity 

will encourage American entrepreneurs and innovators to take 

risks, to raise capital, and to start new ventures. These endeavors 

will need to get to space, and they will do hopefully on the top of 

American rockets, but in order to do that, the office that regulates 
155 

and promotes the commercial launch industry must be well positioned to carry out this job efficiently and effectively. 

I have long been a vocal proponent of FAA’s Office of Commercial 

Space Transportation, or sometimes called FAA AST. I have led the 

fight to provide it with increased resources and update the regulations under its purview. For this office to truly be effective, however, it cannot be buried within the FAA where it must compete 

for resources and it has to compete for focus. It must be moved 

back to the secretariat level within the Department of Transportation. 

My amendment is very simple. It calls for a GAO study to assess 

the pros and cons of moving FAA AST out of the FAA and to make 

it an Assistant Secretary of Transportation position and the issues 

that would need to be addressed in such a move. While I am a firm 

believer that this move must be done, I think that we have to have 

full situational awareness so that we do it right and that our colleagues are comfortable with doing so. 

Just a few seconds ago, Mr. Webster from Florida asked me 

how—if we were to privatize FAA how my amendment would be affected, and the question is a good one, and the answer is, I don’t 

know. I want to make it very clear what this amendment is and 

what it does. We’re just asking the GAO to do a study. If we were 

to take FAA AST, move it out of FAA move it under the Secretary 

of Transportation, and take the current Associate Administrator of 

the FAA into an Assistant Secretary of Transportation, that’s what 

this study getting at. What does it require, what do we need to do 

to make that happen, and what will the impact be? And of course, 

the privatization of the FAA is a question that we don’t if that’s 

going to happen yet, No. 1, and No. 2, if it does happen, what will 

happen to AST if that does happen. So Mr. Webster had a great 

question. Hopefully this study will get us more smart on what that 

does. 

So Mr. Chairman, if we don’t address the relationship between 

what we are trying to do in the American Space Commerce Free 

Enterprise Act and the FAA AST, I fear we might be setting FAA 

AST up for failure. This amendment is a good first step in a process to support AST. Let me clear, when I say AST, I’m talking 

about the Office of Commercial Space Transportation. We want to 

support that office and move it back up to the Department of 

Transportation. All this amendment does is, it creates a study to 

see how we would do that, and if we did, what the implications 

would be. 

With that, I urge its adoption, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Would the gentleman yield to me before he 

yields back? 

Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Yes, sir. 

Chairman SMITH. And that is simply so that I can say I want to 

thank you for offering the amendment, and I recommend it to my 

colleagues. It adds to the piece of legislation. 

Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Are there other Members who want to be recognized? The gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I just want to support that. I think we need that 

information, and I appreciate you bringing it forward. 
156 

Chairman SMITH. 

The question is on agreeing to the amendment. 

All in favor, say aye. 

All opposed, say nay. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

We will now go to our last amendment, and it’s going to be an 

amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. 

Perlmutter. I can see his hand, and he is recognized. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes, and the clerk will report the 

amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 2809 offered by Mr. Perlmutter 

of Colorado, amendment #010. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Sure. Under the bill, there is a Committee, 

Private Space Activity Advisory Committee, that’s constituted and 

it has among its duties a variety of things. What this amendment 

does at page 27, line 12, it adds the Committee is supposed to also 

consider our aerospace industry’s access to adequate, predictable 

and reliable ratio frequency spectrum, so to just make sure that 

spectrum is available to the aerospace industry, and that’s all the 

amendment does, and with that, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Has the gentleman yielded back? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I did. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you for the amendment. I’ll recognize myself simply to say I support the amendment and urge my 

colleagues to support it as well. 

Is there any further discussion on the amendment? 

If not, all in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

We’re going to go to final passage. Before he leaves the room, at 

the risk of hurting him back home, I do want to thank Perlmutter 

for substantially improving the legislation, and—but honestly and 

seriously, this is a good bipartisan piece of legislation, and we’ve 

had others dealing with space. It is a wonderful subject for us to 

be excited about and that will inspire others as well. 

If there are no further amendments, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 2809 to the House as amended with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 2809 to the House 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

Without objection, the Motion to Reconsider is laid upon the 

table. H.R. 2809 is ordered reported to the House. 

I ask unanimous consent that staff authorized to make any necessary technical and conforming changes. Without objection, so ordered. 
157 

Thank you all. This was great attendance today. I appreciate 

everybody’s input, and the gentlewoman from Texas, the Ranking 

Member, is recognized. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, this is not intended to be a goodbye to Mr. Perlmutter. 

Chairman SMITH. We stand adjourned. Thank you, all. 

[Whereupon, at 2:38 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(159) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 2809, AMENDMENT ROSTER
160 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION 

(Original Sign•ture of Member) 

H.R. 

To amend title 51, United States Code, to provide for the authorization 

and supen;sion of nongowrnmental space acth;ties, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

J\11_. introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on 

A BILL 

To amend title 51, United States Code, to provide for the 

authorization and supervision of nongovernmental space 

activities, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep1·esenta2 tives of the United States qf America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "American Space Com5 merce Free Enterprise Act of 2017". 

&,c. 1. Short title; table of contents. 

Sec. 2. Findings; policy; puq>oses. 

Sec. 3. Certificates to operate space oltjects. 

Sec. 4. Permitting of spaee-based remote sensing systems. 

See. 5. Administrative provisions related to certification and permitting. 

Sec. 6. Technical and conforming amendments. 

g:IVHLC\0601171060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
161 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

2 

Sec. 7. Office of Space Commer~e. 

Sec. 8. Restriction on preventing launches and reentries of certii1ed space objects. 

Sec. 9. Report on registration of space objects. 

1 SEC. 2. FINDINGS; POLICY; PURPOSES. 

2 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds the following: 

3 (1) The United States, through existing author4 ization and supervision mechanisms, satisfies and is 

5 in conformity with its obligation under the Outer 

6 Space Treaty to authorize and supervise nongovern7 mental space actiYities to assure such activities are 

8 carried out in conformity with the international obli9 gations of the United States under the Outer Space 

10 Treaty. 

II (2) The United States has a robust and innovaI2 tive private sector that is investing in, developing, 

13 and placing into outer space, spacecraft and pay14 loads. 

I5 (3) Authorization and supervision mechanisms 

I6 as of the date of enactment of this Act could be im17 proved to relieve administrative burdens on new and 

18 innovative nongovernmental space actors. 

19 ( 4) It serves the national interest to address 

20 misperceptions of legal uncertainty through the es21 tablishment of a general authorization and super22 vision certification authority for nongovemmental 

23 outer space activities. 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
162 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

3 

I ( 5) The private exploration and use of outer 

2 space by nongovernmental entities will further the 

3 national security, foreign policy, and economic inter4 ests of the United States. 

5 (b) POLICY.-It is the policy of the United States 

6 that7 (I) United States citizens and entities are free 

8 to explore and use space, including the utilization of 

9 outer space and resources contained therein, without 

10 conditions or limitations; 

II (2) this freedom is only to be limited when neeI2 essary to assure United States national security in13 terests are met and to authorize and supervise nonI4 governmental space activities to assure such activiI5 ties are carried out in conformity with the interI6 national obligations of the United States under the 

I7 Outer Space Treaty; 

I8 (3) to the maximum extent practicable, the 

I9 Federal Government shall interpret and fulfill its 

20 international obligations to minimize regulations and 

2I limitations on the freedom of United States non22 governmental entities to explore and use space; 

23 (4) to the maximum extent practicable, the 

24 Federal GoYernment shall take steps to protect the 

25 physical safety of space objects operated by the 

g:\VHLC\0601171060117.141 .xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
163 

G:\CMfE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_OOZ.XML 

4 

United States that do not involve limitations on the 

2 freedoms of nongovernmental entities of the United 

3 States; and 

4 (5) nongovernmental activities in outer space 

5 shall only be authorized and supervised in a trans6 parent, timely, and predictable manner, with miui7 mal costs and burdens placed on the entities author8 ized and supervised. 

9 (c) PURPOSES.-The purposes of this Act and the 

10 amendments made by this Act are11 (1) to enhance the existing outer space author12 ization and supervision framework to provide greater 

13 transparency, greater efficiency, and less administra14 tive burden for nongovernmental entities of the 

15 United States seeking to conduct space activities; 

16 and 

17 (2) to ensure that the United States remains 

18 the world leader in commercial space activities. 

19 (d) DEFINI'l'IONS.-In this Act20 (1) the term "Agreement on the Rescue of As21 tronauts and the Return of Space Objects" means 

22 the Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Re23 turn of Astronauts and the Return of Objects 

24 Launched into Outer Space (signed at Washington, 

25 Moscow, and London on April 22, 1968, ratified by 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1. 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
164 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

5 

1 the United States on December 3, 1968; 19 UST 

2 7570); 

3 (2) the term "Convention on Registration of 

4 Space Objects" means the Convention on Registra5 tion of Objects Launched into Outer Space (signed 

6 at New York on January 14, 1975, ratified by the 

7 United States on September 15, 1976; 28 UST 

8 695); 

9 (3) the term "covered treaties on outer space" 

10 means11 (A) the Outer Space Treaty; 

12 (B) the Agreement on the Rescue of Astro13 nauts and the Return of Space Objects; 

14 (C) the Convention on Registration of 

15 Space Objects; and 

16 (D) the Liability Convention; 

17 ( 4) the term "Liability Convention" means the 

18 Convention on the International Uability for Dam19 age Caused by Space Objects (signed at Washington, 

20 Moscow, and London on March 29, 1972, ratified by 

21 the United States on October 9, 1973; 24 UST 

22 2389); and 

23 ( 5) the term "Outer Space Treaty" means the 

24 Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of 

25 States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
165 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

6 

1 including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies 

2 (signed at Washington, Moscow, and London on 

3 January 27, 1967, ratified by the United States on 

4 October 10, 1967; 18 UST 2410). 

5 SEC. 3. CERTIFICATES TO OPERATE SPACE OBJECTS. 

6 Title 51, United States Code, is amended by adding 

7 at the end the following: 

8 "Subtitle VIII-Authorization and 

9 Supervision of Nongovern10 mental Space Activities 

11 "CHAPTER 801-CERTIFICATION TO 

12 OPERATE SPACE OBJECTS 

"Sec. 

"80101. Definitions. 

"80102. Certification authority. 

"80103. Certification application and requirements. 

"80104. Mitigation of space debris. 

"80105. Continuing certification requirements. 

"80106. Certification transfer. 

"80107. Certification eJ-.1'iration and termination. 

"80108. Existing license or pending application for launch or reentry. 

"80109. Private Space Activity Advisory Committee. 

"80110. Exemptions. 

"80111. Protecting the interests of United States entity space objed.s. 

13 "§ 80101. Definitions 

14 "In this subtitle: 

15 "(1) AGENCY.-The term 'agency' has the 

16 meaning given the term Executive Agency in section 

17 105 of title 5. 

18 "(2) AGREEMENT ON THE RESCUE OF ASTR0-

19 NAUTS AND THE RETURN OF SPACE OBJECTS.-The 

g:\VHLC\0601 17\060117.141 .xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
166 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_OOZ.XML 

7 

term 'Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts and 

2 the Return of Space Objects' means the Agreement 

3 on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astro4 nauts and the Return of Objects Launched into 

5 Outer Space (signed at Washington, Moscow, and 

6 London on April 22, 1968, ratified by the United 

7 States on December 3, 1968; 19 UST 7570). 

8 "(3) CONvENTION ON REGISTRATION OF SPACE 

9 OBJECTS.-The term 'Convention on Registration of 

10 Space Objects' means the Convention on Registra11 tion of Objects Launched into Outer Space (signed 

12 at New York on January 14, 1975, ratified by the 

13 United States on September 15, 1976; 28 UST 

14 695). 

15 "(4) COVERED TREATIES ON OUTER SPACE.-

16 The term 'covered treaties on outer space' means17 "(A) the Outer Space Treaty; 

18 "(B) the Agreement on the Rescue of As19 tronauts and the Return of Space Objects; 

20 "(C) the Convention on Registration of 

21 Space Objects; and 

22 "(D) the Liability Convention. 

23 "(5) LIABILITY CONVENTION.-The term 'Li24 ability Convention' means the Convention on the 

25 International Liability for Damage Caused by Space 

g:\VHLC\0601171060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
167 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

8 

1 Objects (signed at Washington, Moscow, and Lon2 don on March 29, 1972, ratified by the United 

3 States on October 9, 1973; 24 UST 2389). 

4 "(6) NATIONAL OF THE UNITED STATES.-The 

5 term 'national of the United States' has the meaning 

6 given such term in section 101(a) of the Immigra7 tion and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. llOl(a)). 

8 "(7) OUTER SPACE TREATY.-The term 'Outer 

9 Space Treaty' means the Treaty on Principles Gov1 0 erning the Activities of States in the Exploration 

11 and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and 

12 Other Celestial Bodies (signed at Washington, Mos13 cow, and r~ondon on January 27, 1967, ratified by 

14 the United States on October 10, 1967; 18 UST 

15 2410). 

16 "(8) SECRETARY.-The term 'Secretary' 

17 means, except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, 

18 the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Of19 fice of Space Commerce. 

20 "(9) SPACE-BASED REMOTE SENSING SYS21 TEM.-The term 'space-based remote sensing sys22 tern' means a space object in Earth orbit that is23 "(A) designed to image the Earth; or 

g:\VHLCI0601171060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
168 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

9 

"(B) capable of imaging a space object in 

2 Earth orbit operated by the Federal Govern3 ment. 

4 "(10) SPACE DEBRIS MITIGA'l'ION.-The term 

5 'space debris mitigation' means efforts to6 "(A) prevent on-orbit break-ups; 

7 "(B) remove spacecraft that have reached 

8 the end of their mission operation from useful 

9 densely populated orbit regions; and 

10 "(C) limit the amount of debris released 

11 during normal operations of a space object. 

12 "(11) SPACE OBJECT.-

13 "(A) IN GENI<JRAh-Tbe term 'space ob14 ject' means15 "(i) a human-made object located in 

16 outer space, including on the Moon and 

17 other celestial bodies, with or without 

18 human occupants, that was launched from 

19 Earth, such as a satellite or a spacecraft, 

20 including component parts of the object; 

21 and 

22 "(ii) all items carried on such object 

23 that are intended for use in outer space 

24 outside of, and independent of, the oper25 ation of such object. 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
169 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

10 

1 "(B) INCJ,USION.-Such term includes any 

2 human-made object that is3 "(i) manufactured or assembled m 

4 outer space; and 

5 "(ii) intended for operations in outer 

6 space outside of, and independent of, the 

7 operations of such object in which the 

8 manufacturing or assembly occurred. 

9 "(C) ExcLUSJONS.-Such term does not 

10 include11 "(i) an article on board a space object 

12 that is only intended for use inside the 

13 space object; 

14 "(ii) an article manufactured or proc15 essed in outer space that is a material; or 

16 "(iii) an article intended for use out17 side of a space object as part of the cer18 tified operations of the space object. 

19 "(12) ST"~TE.-The term 'State' means each of 

20 the several States of the United States, the District 

21 of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the 

22 United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American 

23 Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

24 Islands, and any other commonwealth, territory, or 

25 possession of the United States. 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xm! 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
170 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

11 

"(13) UNITED STATES.-The term 'United 

2 States' means the States, collectively. 

3 "(14) UNITED STATES ENTITY.-'l'he term 

4 'United States entity' means5 "(A) an individual who is a national of the 

6 United States; or 

7 "(B) a nongovernmental entity organized 

8 or existing under, and subject to, the laws of 

9 the United States or a State. 

10 "§ 80102. Certification authority 

11 "(a) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 1 year after the 

12 date of enactment of the American Space Commerce Free 

13 Enterprise Act of 2017, the Secretary shall issue a certifi14 cation for the operation of a space object to any United 

15 States entity who submits an application for a certification 

16 in satisfaction of the requirements of this chapter. 

17 "(b) Co:\TStJLTATION.-The Secretary may, as the 

18 Secretary considers necessary, consult with the heads of 

19 other relevant agencies in carrying out the requirements 

20 of this chapter, pursuant to section 80311. 

21 "(c) CER'l'H'ICATION REQUIRED FOR OPERATION.-

22 Beginning on the date that is 1 year after the date of 

23 enactment of the American Space Commerce Free Enter24 prise Act of 2017, a United States entity may not operate 

25 a space object unless the entity holds a certification issued 

g:\VHLC\0601 17\060117. 141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
171 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

12 

1 under this chapter for the operation of such object or the 

2 entity holds a valid payload approval for launch or reentry 

3 under section 50904 as part of a license issued under 

4 chapter 509, and that satisfies the requirements of section 

5 80108(a). 

6 "(d) FOREIGN ENTITIES PROIITBITED.-The Sec7 retary may not issue a certification under this chapter to 

8 any person who is not a United States entity. 

9 "(e) COVERAGE OF CERTIFICATION.-The Secretary 

10 shall, to the maximum extent practicable, require only 1 

11 certification under this chapter for a United States entity 

12 to13 "(1) conduct multiple operations carried out 

14 using a single space object; 

15 "(2) operate multiple space objects that carry 

16 out substantially similar operations; or 

17 "(3) use multiple space objects to carry out a 

18 single space operation. 

19 "§ 80103. Certification application and requirements 

20 "(a) APPLICATION PROCESS.-

21 "(1) IN CHJNERAL.-To be eligible for a certifi22 cation or transfer of a certification to operate a 

23 space object under this chapter, a United States en24 tity shall submit an application to the Secretary as 

25 provided in paragraph (2). Such application shall ing:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
172 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

13 

1 elude, for each required item or attestation, suffi2 cient evidence to demonstrate each fact or assertion. 

3 "(2) CONTEN'rs.-An application described in 

4 paragraph (1) shall include only the following infor5 mation, "'rith respect to each space object and the 

6 operations proposed to be certified: 

7 "(A) The name, address, and contact in8 formation of one or more nationals of the 

9 United States designated by the applicant as 

10 responsible for the operation of the space ob11 ject. 

12 "(B) An affirmation, and a document of 

13 proof, that the applicant is a United States en14 tity. 

15 "(C) If available at the time of submission 

16 of the application, the planned date and loca17 tion of the launch of the space object, including 

18 the identity of the launch provider. 

19 "(D) The general physical form and com20 position of the space object. 

21 "(E) A description of the proposed oper22 ations of the space object that includes23 "(i) when and where the space object 

24 will operate; and 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117. 141.xml 

June 1. 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
173 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

14 

1 "(ii) when and where the operation of 

2 the space object will terminate. 

3 "(P) A description of how the space object 

4 will be operated and disposed of in a manner to 

5 mitigate the generation of space debris. 

6 "(G) Information about third-party liabil7 ity insurance obtained, if any, by the applicant 

8 for operations of the space object, including the 

9 amount and coverage of such liability insurance. 

10 "(H) Whether the space object will include 

11 a space-based remote sensing system. 

12 "(3) ATTESTATIONS.-Al1 application described 

13 in paragraph (1) shall contain an attestation by the 

14 applicant of each the following: 

15 "(A) The space object is not a nuclear 

16 weapon or a weapon of mass destruction. 

17 "(B) The space object will not carry a nu18 clear weapon or weapon of mass destruction. 

19 "(C) The space object will not be operated 

20 or used for testing of any weapon on a celestial 

21 body. 

22 "(D) All information in the application and 

23 supporting documents is true, complete, and ac24 curate. 

25 "(b) REVIEW OF APPLICATION.-

g:\VHLC\0601 1 7\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
174 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

15 

"(1) VJ<JRIFICATION OF INFORMATION Al'\'D AT2 TESTATIONS.-Not later than 60 days after receipt 

3 of an application under this section, the Secretary 

4 shall verify that5 "(A) the application is complete, including 

6 any required supporting documents; 

7 "(B) the application does not contain any 

8 clear indication of fraud or falsification; and 

9 "(C) the application contains each attesta10 tion required under subsection (a)(3). 

11 "(2) DETERMINATION.-Not later than 60 days 

12 after receipt of an application under this seetion13 "(A) if the Secretary verifies that the ap14 plicant has met the application requirements 

15 described in paragraph ( 1), the Secretary shall 

16 approve the application and issue a certification 

17 to the applicant with or without conditions on 

18 the proposed operation of the space object pur19 suant to subsection (c)(1)(A); or 

20 "(B) if the Secretary cannot verify that 

21 the applicant has met the application require22 ments described in paragraph (1) or if the Sec23 retary determines it is necessary to deny the 

24 application pursuant to subsection (c)(1)(B), 

25 the Secretaryg:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
175 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

16 

"(i) shall issue a denial of the applica2 tion signed by the Secretary (a duty that 

3 may not be delegated, including to the Of4 fice of Space Commerce); and 

5 "(ii) shall, not later than 10 days 

6 after the decision to deny the certifi7 cation8 "(I) provide the applicant with a 

9 ~Titten notification containing a clearI 0 ly articulated rationale for the denial 

11 that provides, to the max·imum extent 

12 practicable, guidance to the applicant 

13 as to how such rationale for denial 

14 could be addressed in a subsequent 

15 application; and 

16 "(II) notify the Committee on 

17 Commerce, Science, and Transpor18 tation of the Senate and the Com19 mittee on Science, Space, and Tech20 nology of the House of Representa21 tives of such rationale. 

22 "(3) AUTOMATIC APPROVAL.-If the Secretary 

23 has not approved or denied the application before 

24 the deadline under paragraph (2), the certification 

25 shall be approved without condition. The Secretary 

g:\VHLC\0601171060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
176 

G:\CMTE\S015\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

17 

may not allow tolling of the 60 day period under 

2 such paragraph. 

3 "(4) IMPROPER BASIS FOR DENIAL.-The Sec4 retary may not deny an application for a certifi5 cation under this section in order to protect an exist6 ing certification holder from competition. 

7 "(5) SuBSEQUENT REVIEW.-The Secretary 

8 may not prE\judice a new application for the pro9 posed operations denied pursuant to paragraph 

10 (2)(B) if such new application contains remedies ad11 dressing the rationale for such denial. 

12 "(c) COMPLIA.t'l"CE WITH THE OUTER SPACE TREA13 TY.-

14 "(1) IN GENERAL.-If the Secretary deter15 mines, with clear and convincing evidence, that the 

16 proposed operation of a space object under an appli17 cation for a certification under this chapter is a violS lation of an international obligation of the United 

19 States pertaining to a nongovernmental entity of the 

20 United States under the Outer Space Treaty21 "(A) the Secretary may condition the pro22 posed operation coYered by the certification only 

23 to the extent necessary to prevent a violation of 

24 such international obligation; or 

g:\VHLC\0601 17\0601 17.141.xm! 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
177 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

18 

1 "(B) if the Secretary determines that there 

2 is no practicable way to condition such certifi3 cation to prevent such a violation, the Secretary 

4 may deny the application. 

5 "(2) LIMITA'l'ION FOR DETE&"JINATIONS.-A 

6 determination under paragraph (1) shall be limited 

7 as follows: 

8 "(A) The Federal Government shall inter9 pret and fulfill its international obligations 

10 under the Outer Space Treaty in a manner that 

11 minimizes regulations and limitations on the 

12 freedom of United States nongovernmental enti13 ties to explore and use space. 

14 "(B) The Federal Government shall interIS pret and fulfill its international oblig-ations 

16 under the Outer Space Treaty in a manner that 

17 promotes free enterprise in outer space. 

18 "(C) The Federal Government shall not 

19 presume all obligations of the United States 

20 under the Outer Space Treaty are obligations to 

21 be imputed upon United States nongovern22 mental entities. 

23 "(D) Guidelines promulgated by the Com24 mittee on Space Research may not be considg:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1. 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
178 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_OOZ.XML 

19 

1 ered international obligations of the United 

2 States. 

3 "(3) PRESUMPTIONS.-ln making a determina4 tion under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall pre5 sume, absent clear and convincing eYidence to the 

6 contrary, that7 "(A) any attestation made by an applicant 

8 pursuant to subsection (a)(3) is sufficient to 

9 meet the international obligations of the United 

10 States pertaining to nongovernmental entities of 

11 the United States under the Outer Space Trea12 ty addressed by such attestation; and 

13 "(B) reasonably commercially available ef14 forts are sufficient to be in conformity with the 

15 international obligations of the United States 

16 pertaining to nongovernmental entities of the 

17 United States under the Outer Space Treaty. 

18 "(4) PROHIBITION ON RETROACTIVE CONDI19 TIONS.-No other modifications may be made, or 

20 additional conditions placed, on a certification after 

21 the date on which the certification is issued (except 

22 to account for a material change as provided in sec23 tion 80105(c) or the removal of a condition pursuant 

24 to subsection (d)). 

g:IVHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659446125) 
179 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

20 

"(5) NONDEI,EGABI,E.-The responsibilities of 

2 the Secretary under this subsection may not be dele3 gated, including to the Office of Space Commerce. 

4 "(d) AUTHORITY TO REMOVE CONDITIONS.-The 

5 Secretary, as determined appropriate, may remove a con6 dition placed on a certification pursuant to subsection (c). 

7 "§ 80104. Mitigation of space debris 

8 "(a) PLAN SUBMISSION.-To be eligible for a certifi9 cation under this chapter, each application shall include 

10 a space debris mitigation plan for the space object. Such 

11 plan12 "(1) shall take into account best practice gnide13 lines promulgated by the United States and the 

14 Interagency Debris Coordinating Committee; and 

15 "(2) may take into account that a space object 

16 may end certified operations and be stored in a safe 

17 manner until such time as the space object is perma18 nently disposed of or certified for further operations. 

19 "(b) IMPLEMENTATION.-To the maximum extent 

20 practicable, a holder of a certification under this chapter 

21 shall notify the Secretary not later than 30 days before 

22 beginning to implement the disposal phase of a space de23 bris mitigation plan described in subsection (a). Such cer24 tification holder shall, not later than 30 days after eomg:\VHLC\060117\060117 .141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
180 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

21 

pleting implementation of such phase, update the Sec2 retary of the results of any space debris mitigation efforts. 

3 "§ 80105. Continuing certification requirements 

4 "(a) NOTIFICA'l'ION REQUIREMENT.-A certification 

5 holder shall, in a timely manner, notify the Secretary if6 "(1) a certified space object has terminated op7 erations; or 

8 "(2) a catastrophic event has occurred to a ccr9 tified space object, such as the unplanned destruc10 tion of a space object. 

11 "(b) .1\lATI<JRIAL CIIANGE.-The Secretary shall re12 quire certification holders to inform the Secretary of13 "(1) any material changes to the space object 

14 or the planned operations of the space object prior 

15 to launch; and 

16 "(2) any material anomalies or departures from 

17 the planned operations during the course of opcr18 ations. 

19 "(c) UPDATE TO CERTIFICATION.-Not later than 14 

20 days after the date of receipt of information regarding a 

21 material change pursuant to subsection (b), the Secretary 

22 shall make a determination of whether such material 

23 change is substantial enough to warrant additional review 

24 under section 80103(b). Not later than 60 days after a 

25 determination that such review is warranted, the Secretary 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117 .141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
181 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_OOZ.XML 

22 

shall complete a similar such review process for such mate2 rial change as is required for a certification applicant 

3 under such section. 

4 "§ 80106. Certification transfer 

5 "(a) IN GENERAL.-Subject to subsections (b) and 

6 (c), the Secretary shall provide for the transfer of a certifi7 cation under this chapter from the certification holder to 

8 another United States entity to continue the operations 

9 allowed under such certification. 

10 "(b) TR.A.1'ISFER REQUEST REQUIREMENTS.-'l'o be 

11 eligible for a transfer under subsection (a), the certifi12 cation holder shall submit to the Secretary a request that 

13 includes14 "(1) any identifying information regarding the 

15 proposed transferee, including accompanying sup16 porting documents, that would be required under an 

17 initial application under section 80103; and 

18 "(2) each attestation required under section 

19 80103 (a)( 3), including accompanying supporting 

20 documents, completed by the proposed transferee. 

21 "(c) DETERMINATION.-Not later than 60 days after 

22 a certification holder submits a request under subsection 

23 (b), the Secretary shall complete a similar review process 

24 for the request for transfer as required for a certification 

25 applicant under section 80103(b). 

g:IVHLC\0601171060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
182 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_OOZ.XML 

23 

1 "§ 80107. Certification expiration and termination 

2 "(a) CERTIFICATION EXPIRATION.-

3 "(1) IN GENERAL.-A certification issued under 

4 this chapter shall expire on the earlier of5 "(A) the date on which all operations ap6 proved under such certification cease, including 

7 carrying· out a space debris mitigation plan of 

8 any space object approved under such certifi9 cation; 

10 "(B) the date on which all space objects 

11 approved under the certification no longer exist; 

12 or 

13 "(C) the date that is 5 years after the date 

14 on which the certification was approved, if no 

15 operations approved under the certification have 

16 commenced by such date. 

17 "(b) CERTU'ICATION TERMINATION.-

18 "(1) IN GENERAI •. -The Secretary shall termi19 nate a certification under this chapter if an appli20 cant or certification holder is convicted of a violation 

21 of section 1001 of title 18 related to the certification 

22 process under this chapter. 

23 "(2) ELIGIDILI'l'Y.-A certification holder 

24 whose certification is terminated under this sub25 section shall be ineligible to apply for or receive a 

26 certification under this chapter. 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
183 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA~002.XML 

24 

1 "(3) SPACE DEBRIS MITIGATION PJ..AN.-Upon 

2 termination of a certification under paragraph (1), 

3 the Secretary may require the certification holder to 

4 carry out the space debris mitigation plan submitted 

5 by the certification holder under section 80104. 

6 "§ 80108. Existing license or pending application for 

7 launch or reentry 

8 "(a) CONTINUATION OF EXISTING LICENSE.-Any 

9 United States entity for whom a payload has been ap10 proved (and not subject to an exemption under section 

11 80110) on or before the effective date of this section for 

12 launch or reentry under section 50904 as part of a license 

13 issued under chapter 509 may14 "(1) elect to be immediately considered certified 

15 for operation under this chapter on such effective 

16 date, in which case all terms and conditions applica17 ble to the payload as approved for launch or reentry 

18 as part of a license issued under chapter 509 shall 

19 apply for the duration of the operation of the pay20 load; or 

21 "(2) apply for a certification under this chapter 

22 for the operation of the licensed activities and may 

23 continue to operate pursuant to such license until 

24 such time as such certification is issued. 

g:\VHLC\0601171060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
184 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

25 

1 "(b) RESCINDING OR TRANSFER OF PENDING l.JI2 CENSE.-A payload of a United States entity that, on the 

3 effective date of this section, is pending approval under 

4 section 50904 as part of a launch or reentry license issued 

5 under chapter 509 may be, at the election of the applicant 

6 for payload approval7 "(1) rescinded without prejudice; or 

8 "(2) transferred to the Office of Space Com9 merce and deemed to be a pending application for 

10 certification under this chapter. 

11 "(c) EFFEC'l'IVE DATE.-This section shall take ef12 feet on the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment 

13 of the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 

14 2017. 

15 "§80109. Private Space Activity Advisory Committee 

16 "(a) ESTABUSHMENT.-The Secretary shall estab17 lish a Private Space Activity Advisory Committee (in this 

18 section referred to as the 'Committee') consisting of 15 

19 members who shall be appointed by the Secretary. 

20 "(b) CIIAIR.-The Committee shall designate one 

21 member as the chair of the Committee. 

22 "(c) MEMBERSHIP.-

23 "(1) LIMITATION.-Members of the Committee 

24 may not be Federal Government employees or offi25 cials. 

g:IVHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
185 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_OOZ.XML 

26 

"(2) TRAVEl, EXPENSES.-J\!Iembers of the 

2 Committee shall receive travel expenses, including 

3 per diem in lieu of subsistence, in accordance with 

4 the applicable provisions under subchapter I of chap5 ter 57 of title 5. 

6 "(3) QUALIFICATIONS.-lVIembers of the Com7 mittee shall include a variety of space policy, engi8 neering, technical, science, legal, and finance profes9 sionals. Not less than 3 members shall have signifi10 cant experience working in the commercial space in11 dustry. 

12 "(d) TERMS.-Each member of the Committee shall 

13 serve for a term of 4 years and may not serve as a member 

14 for the 2-year period following the date of completion of 

15 each such term. 

16 "(e) DUTIES.-The duties of the Committee shall be 

17 to18 "(1) analyze the status and recent develop19 ments of nongovernmental space activities; 

20 "(2) analyze the effectiveness and efficiency of 

21 the implementation of the certification process under 

22 this chapter; 

23 "(3) provide recommendations to the Secretary 

24 and Congress on how the United States can faeili25 tate and promote a robust and innovative private 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141 .xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
186 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

27 

1 sector that is investing in, developing, and operating 

2 space objects; 

3 "(4) identify any challenges the United States 

4 private sector is eh.1Jeriencing5 "(A) with the authorization and super6 vision of the operation of space objects under 

7 this chapter; 

8 "(B) more generally, with international ob9 ligations of the United States relevant to pri10 vate sector activities in outer space; and 

11 "(C) with harmful interference to private 

12 sector activities in outer space; 

13 " ( 5) review existing best practices for United 

14 States entities to avoid the harmful contamination of 

15 the Moon and other celestial bodies; 

16 "(6) review existing best practices for United 

17 States entities to avoid adverse changes in the envi18 ronment of the Earth resulting from the introduc19 tion of extraterrestrial matter; 

20 "(7) provide information, advice, and rec21 ommendations on matters relating to United States 

22 private sector activities in outer space; and 

23 "(8) provide information, advice, and rec24 ommendations on matters related to the authority of 

25 the Secretary under this chapter or to private sector 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
187 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

28 

1 space activities authorized pursuaut to this chapter 

2 that the Committee determines necessary. 

3 "(f) ANNUAL REPORT.-The Committee shall submit 

4 to Congress, the President, and the Secretary an annual 

5 report that includes the information, analysis, findings, 

6 and recommendations deseribed in subseetion (e). 

7 "(g) SUNSE'r.-The Committee shall terminate on 

8 the date that is 10 years after the date on which the Com9 mittee is established. 

10 "§ 80110. Exemptions 

11 "(a) IN GENERAL.-A certification is not required 

12 under this chapter for any of the following operations: 

13 " ( 1) Space object activities authorized by an14 other country that is a party to the Outer Space 

15 Treaty. 

16 "(2) Launch or reentry vehicle operations li17 censed by the Department of Transportation under 

18 chapter 509. 

19 "(3) Space stations licensed by the Federal 

20 Communications Commission under the Communica21 tions Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 151 et seq.). 

22 "(b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.-Nothing in this sec23 tion shall be construed to exempt any entity from the re24 quirement to obtain a permit to operate a space-based re25 mote sensing system under chapter 802. 

g:IVHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
188 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

29 

1 "§ 80111. Protecting the interests of United States en2 tity space objects 

3 "The President shall ensure that United States entity 

4 exploration and use of outer space, including commercial 

5 activity and the exploitation of space resources, is secure 

6 from aets of foreign aggression and foreign harmful inter7 ference and is given due regard, and the President shall 

8 uphold the ownership rights of space objects of United 

9 States entities. Space objeets certified under this chapter 

10 shall receive the full protection of the United States.". 

11 SEC. 4. PERMI'ITING OF SPACE-BASED REMOTE SENSING 

12 SYSTEMS. 

13 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds the following: 

14 (1) The commercial market for space-based re15 mote sensing teehnologies and information has expe16 rienced significant growth since the passage of the 

17 Land Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992. 

18 (2) It is in the interest of the United States to 

19 foster new and novel spaee-based remote sensing ap20 plications and services and to help facilitate their 

21 continued domestic growth. 

22 (3) Since the passage of the Land Remote 

23 Sensing Policy Act of 1992, the National Oceanic 

24 and Atmospheric Administration's Office of Com25 mercial Remote Sensing has experienced a signifi26 cant increase in applications for private remote sensg:\VHLC\0601171060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
189 

G:\CMTE\S015\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

30 

ing space system licenses as authorized under sec2 tion 60121 of title 51, United States Code. 

3 ( 4) Many of the applicants for commercial 

4 space-based remote sensing licenses have encoun5 tered significant delays and unnecessary obstacles in 

6 the application process. 

7 (5) The current licensing paradigm must be up8 dated as to not discourage the continued growth of 

9 the United States space-based remote sensing indus1 0 try. It must be updated in a WaY that satisfies the 

11 needs of commercial remote sensing market as well 

12 as the national security of the United States. 

13 (6) In order to protect United States leadership 

14 and commercial viability in remote sensing tech15 nologies, the Federal Government should not limit 

16 commercial entities from providing remote sensing 

17 capabilities or data products that are available or 

18 reasonably expected to be made available in the next 

19 3 years in the international or domestic marketplace. 

20 (b) POLICY.-lt is the policy of the United States 

21 that, to the maximum extent practicable, the Federal Gov22 ernment shall take steps to protect the national security 

23 interests of the United States that do not involve regu24 lating or limiting the freedoms of United States non25 governmental entities to explore and use space. Federal 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
190 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.JL\1L 

31 

1 Government agencies shall mitigate any threat to national 

2 security posed by the exploration and use of outer space 

3 by United States citizens and entities, to the maximum 

4 extent practicable, changing .l<~ederal Government activi5 ties and operations. 

6 (c) AlVIENDMENT.-Title 51, United States Code, ts 

7 further amended by adding at the end the following: 

8 "CHAPTER 802-PERMITTING OF SPACE9 BASED REMOTE SENSING SYSTEMS 

''Sec. 

"80201. Permitting authority. 

"80202. Application for permit. 

"80203. Continuing permitting requirements. 

"80204. Permit transfer. 

"80205. A,cr•mcy activities. 

"80206. Annual reports. 

"80207. Advisory Committee on Commercial &mote Sensing. 

"80208. Continuation of existing license or pending application. 

"80209. Commercial Remote Sensing Regulatory Affairs Office. 

10 "§80201. Permitting authority 

11 "(a) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 1 year after the 

12 date of enactment of the American Space Commerce Free 

13 Enterprise Act of 2017, the Secretary is authorized to per14 mit persons to operate space-based remote sensing sys15 terns. 

16 "(b) CONSULTATION.-The Secretary may, as the 

17 Secretary considers necessary, consult with the heads of 

18 other relevant agencies in carrying out the requirements 

19 of this chapter, pursuant to section 80311. 

g:IVHLCI0601171060117.141.xml 

June 1. 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
191 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_OOZ.XML 

32 

1 "(e) LIMITATION WITH RESPECT TO SYSTJ<JM USED 

2 FOR OTHER PURPOSES.-ln the ease of a spaee objeet 

3 that is used for remote sensing and other purposes, the 

4 authority of the Seeretary under this ehapter shall be lim5 ited to the remote sensing operations of sueh spaee objeet. 

6 "(d) DE MINIMIS EXCJ<JPTION.-

7 "(1) WAIVER.-The Seeretary may wawe the 

8 requirement for a permit for a space-based remote 

9 sensing system that the Secretary determines is1 0 "(A) ancillary to the primary design pur11 pose of the spaee object; or 

12 "(B) too trivial to require a determination 

13 under seetion 80202(c) relating to national se14 curity. 

15 "(2) GUIDA."<CK-Not later than 1 year after 

16 the date of enactment of this subsection, the Sec17 retary shall issue guidance providing a clear expla18 nation of the eriteria used by the Seeretary to gTant 

19 a de minimis waiver under paragraph (1)(B) for a 

20 space-based remote sensing system that is too trivial 

21 to require a determination under seetion 80202(c). 

22 "(e) COVERAGJ<J OF PERMI'l'.-The Secretary shall, to 

23 the maximum extent praetieable, ensure that only one per24 mit is required under this ehapter tog:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
192 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

33 

" ( 1) conduct multiple operations carried out 

2 using a space-based remote sensing system; 

3 "(2) operate multiple space-based remote sens4 ing systems that carry out substantially similar op5 erations; or 

6 "(3) use multiple space-based remote sensing 

7 systems to carry out a single remote sensing oper8 ation. 

9 "(f) PROHIBITION ON 0PERATION.-Not later than 

10 1 year after the date of enactment of the American Space 

11 Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 2017, no person may, 

12 directly or through any subsidiary or affiliate, operate any 

13 space-based remote sensing s.ystem without a permit 

14 issued under this chapter. 

15 "{g) RESPONSIBLE PARTY.-ln any case in which the 

16 applicant for a permit under this chapter is not a United 

17 States entity, the applicant shall identity a United States 

18 entity that consents to be responsible for the permitted 

19 operation of the space-based remote sensing system. 

20 "(h) OPERATION Ol<' SPACE-BASED REMOTE SENSING 

21 SYSTEM.-l'~or purposes of this chapter, the operation of 

22 a space-based remote sensing system23 

24 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

"(1) begins when the s:ystem-

"(A) is located in outer space; and 

(659448125) 
193 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

"(B) ean meet the minimum threshold and 

2 objective capabilities for the system's stated 

3 need; and 

4 "(2) shall not cover the acts of distribution, 

5 sale, or transfer of data, information, or serviees to 

6 persons, foreign or domestie, including any such acts 

7 taken pursuant to an agreement with sueh persons. 

8 "§ 80202. Application for permit 

9 "(a) APPIJICATION PROCESS.-

10 "(1) IN GENERAL.-To receive a permit to op11 erate a space-based remote sensing system under 

12 this ehapter, a person shall snbmit au applieation to 

13 the Seeretary as provided in paragraph (2). Sueh 

14 application shall include, for each required item, suf15 ficient evidence to demonstrate each faet or asser16 tion. 

17 "(2) CONTENTS.-An application deseribed in 

18 paragraph (1) shall include only the following infor19 mation, with respect to caeh space-based remote 

20 sensing system and the operations proposed to be 

21 permitted: 

22 "(A) The name, address, and contact in23 formation of one or more United States entity 

24 identified by the applicant, pursuant to section 

g:WHLC\0601171060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
194 

G:\CMTEISC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

35 

80201 (g), as responsible for the operation of 

the space-based remote sensing system. 

"(B) If available at the time of submission 

of the application, the planned date and location of the launch of the applicable space object, 

ineluding the identity of the launch provider. 

"(C) The general physical form and composition of the space-based remote sensing systern. 

"(D) A description of the proposed operations of the space-based remote sensing system 

that includes-

"(i) when and where the space-based 

remote sensing system will operate; 

"(ii) when and where the operation of 

the space-based remote sensing system will 

terminate; and 

"(iii) any additional information neeessary to make a determination under subsection (c) regarding a significant threat to 

national security, as prescribed in advance 

in regulation by the Secretary. 

"(E) A description of how the space-based 

remote sensing system will be operated and dis-

(659448125) 
195 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

:36 

posed of in a manner to mitigate the generation 

2 of space debris. 

3 "(F) Information about third-party liabil4 ity insurance obtained, if any, by the applicant 

5 for operations of the space-based remote sens6 ing system, ineluding the amount and coverage 

7 of such liability insurance. 

8 "(b) REVIEW OF APPLICATION.-

9 "(1) VERIFICATIONS.-Not later than 60 days 

10 after receipt of an application under this section, the 

11 Secretary shall verity that12 "(A) the application 1s complete pursuant 

13 to subsection (a); and 

14 "(B) the application does not contain any 

15 clear indication of fraud or falsification. 

16 "(2) DETERMINATION.-Not later than 60 days 

17 after receipt of an application under this section18 "(A) if the Seeretary verifies that the ap19 plicant has met the application requirements 

20 described in paragraph (1), the Secretary shall 

21 approve the application and issue a permit to 

22 the applicant with or without conditions on the 

23 proposed operation of the space-based remote 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

sensing system pursuant to subseetion 

(c)(l)(A); or 

(659448125) 
196 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

37 

"(B) if the Secretary cannot verify that 

the applicant has met the application requirements described in paragraph (1) or if the Secretary makes a determination to deny the application under subsection (c)(l)(B), the Secretary-

"(i) shall issue a denial of the application signed by the Secretary (a duty that 

may not be delegated, including to the Office of Space Commerce); and 

"(ii) shall, not later than 10 days 

after the decision to deny the application-

(659448125) 

"(I) provide the applicant with a 

written notification containing a clearly articulated rationale for the denial 

that, to the maximum extent practicable-

"(aa) provides guidance to 

the applicant as to how the articulated rationale for denial 

could be addressed m a subsequent application; and 

"(bb) includes all classified 

information included in such rationale for which the applicant 
197 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 

38 

has the required security clearance; and 

"(II) submit a notification of the 

denial to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of 

the Senate and the Committee on 

Science, Space, and Technology of the 

House of Representatives that-

"(aa) contains the clearly 

articulated rationale for the denial; and 

"(bb) in the case of a denial 

pursuant to a national security 

determination under subsection 

(c)-

"(AA) includes an explanation of how, and clear 

and convincing evidence 

that, to the maximum extent 

practicable, the Federal 

Government took steps to 

mitigate a significant threat 

to the national security of 

the United States posed by 

the operation of the appli-
198 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

39 

cant's space-based remote 

sensing· system by changing 

Federal Government activities and operations; and 

"(BB) may contain 

6 classified information. 

7 "(3) AuTOJiilATIC APPROVAlJ.-If the Secretary 

8 has not approved or denied the application before 

9 the deadline under paragraph (2), the application 

10 shall be approved ·without condition. The Secretary 

11 may not allow tolling of the 60 day period under 

12 such paragraph. 

13 "(4) lMPIWPER BASIS FOR DENIAI •. -The Sec14 retary may not deny an application for a permit 

15 under this section in order to protect an existing 

16 permit holder from competition. 

17 "(5) SUBSEQUENT REVIEW.-The Secretary 

18 may not prejudice a new application for the pro19 posed operations denied pursuant to paragraph 

20 (2)(B) if such new application contains remedies ad21 dressing the rationale for such denial. 

22 "(c) ADDRESSING NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT.-

23 "(1) IN GENERAI..-lf the Secretary deter24 mines, with clear and convincing evidence, that the 

25 proposed operation of a space-based remote sensing 

g:WHLC\060117\060117 .141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
199 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

40 

system under an application for a permit under this 

2 chapter poses a significant threat to the national se3 curity of the United States as provided in paragraph 

4 (2)-

5 "(A) the Secretary may condition the pro6 posed operation covered by the permit only to 

7 the extent necessary to address such threat; or 

8 "(B) if the Secretary detennines that there 

9 is no practicable way to condition such permit 

I 0 to address such threat, the Secretary may deny 

11 the application. 

12 "(2) SIGNIFICANT THREAT TO NATIONAl, SECU13 RITY.-For purposes of a determination under para14 graph (1), a significant threat to the national secu15 rity of the United States is a threat16 "(A) that is imminent; and 

17 "(B) that cannot practicably be mitigated 

18 through changes to Federal Government activi19 ties or operations. 

20 "(3) REASONABLY COMlVIERCIAI,LY AVAILABLE 

21 I<JFFORTS.-To the ma.-ximum extent practicable, the 

22 Secretary shall only place a condition on a permit 

23 that is achievable using reasonably commercially 

24 available efforts. 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1. 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
200 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

41 

1 "(4) NOTIFICATION.-Not later than 10 days 

2 after the decision to condition the proposed oper3 ation covered by a permit pursuant to this sub4 section, the Secretary shall5 "(A) provide the applicant with a written 

6 notification containing a clearly articulated ra7 tionale for the condition that, to the maximum 

8 extent practicable9 "(i) provides guidance to the applicant 

10 as to how the articulated rationale for con11 dition could be addressed in a subsequent 

12 application; and 

13 "(ii) includes all classified information 

14 included in such rationale for which the 

15 applicant has the required security clear16 ance; and 

17 "(B) submit a notification of the condition 

18 to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

19 Transportation of the Senate and the Com20 mittee on Science, Space, and Technology of 

21 the House of Representatives that22 "(i) contains the clearly articulated 

23 rationale for the condition; 

24 "(ii) includes an explanation of how, 

25 and clear and convincing evidence that, to 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
201 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

42 

the maximum extent practicable, the Fed2 era! Government took steps to mitigate a 

3 significant threat to the national security 

4 of the United States posed by the oper5 ation of the applicant's space-based remote 

6 sensing system by changing Federal gov7 ernment activities and operations; and 

8 "(iii) may contain classified informa9 tion. 

10 "(5) PROHIBITION ON RETROACTIVE CONDI11 TIONS.-No other modifications may be made, or 

12 additional conditions placed, on a permit after the 

13 date on which the permit is issued except to account 

14 for a material change as provided in section 

15 80203(c). 

16 "(6) NONDELEGABLE.-The responsibilities of 

17 the Secretary under this subsection may not be dcle18 gated, including to the Office of Space Commerce. 

19 "(d) I~IMITATIONS ON CONDITIONS.-

20 "(1) SAME OR SIMIIulli CAPABILITY.-No oper21 ational condition under subsection (c) may be placed 

22 on a space-based remote sensing system that has the 

23 same or substantially similar space-based remote 

24 sensing capabilities as another system permitted 

25 under this chapter with uo such condition. 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
202 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

43 

"(2) CONDITIONS THAT EXCEED PERMITTED 

2 CONDlTIONS.-The Secretary may not place a condi3 tion on a permit for a space-based remote sensing 

4 system that exceeds a condition placed on an existS ing permitted system that has the same or substan6 tially similar capabilities. 

7 "(e) COMMERCIAUN AVAILABJ,E CAPABIUTY.-

8 "(1) ExcEPTION.-The Secretary may not deny 

9 an application for, or place a condition on, a permit 

10 for the operation of a space-based remote sensing 

11 system for which the same or substantially similar 

12 capabilities, derived data, products, or services are 

13 already commercially available or reasonably ex14 pected to be made available in the next 3 years in 

15 the international or domestic marketplace. The ex16 ception in the previous sentence applies regardless of 

17 whether the marketplace products and services origi18 nate from the operation of aireraft, ui1manned air19 eraft, or other platforms or teclmieal means or are 

20 assimilated from a variety of data sources. 

21 "(2) CLEAR 1L'1D CONVINCING Ev'lDENCE.-

22 Each denial of an application for, and each condition 

23 placed on, a permit for the operation of a space24 based remote sensing system, shall include an expla25 nation of, and clear and convincing evidence that, 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117 .141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
203 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

44 

the exception under paragraph ( 1) does not apply 

2 with respect to the proposed permitted operations of 

3 such system. 

4 "(3) DATABASE.-The President shall5 "(A) maintain a database of commercially 

6 available capabilities described in paragraph 

7 (1); 

8 "(B) update such database not less than 

9 once every 3 months; and 

10 "(C) submit to the Committee on Com11 merce, Science, and Transportation of the Sen12 ate and the Committee on Science, Space, and 

13 Technology of the House of Representatives a 

14 report containing the contents of the database 

15 upon each update required under subparagraph 

16 (B). 

17 "( 4) .APPLICANT SUBMISSIONS.-An applicant 

18 for, or holder of, a permit for the operation of a 

19 space-based remote sensing system may submit to 

20 the Secretary evidence of, or information regarding, 

21 a commercially available capability described in 

22 paragraph (1) for consideration for inclusion in the 

23 database. 

24 "(5) NONAPPLICATION OF CONDITION.-ln any 

25 case in which the Secretary determines that the exg:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
204 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

45 

ception under paragraph ( 1) applies with respect to 

2 a permit for the operation of a space-based remote 

3 sensing system for which the Secretary has placed a 

4 condition under subsection (c), such condition shall 

5 no longer apply with respect to such permitted oper6 ations. 

7 "(f) AUTHORITY TO REMOVE CONDITIONS.-Nothing 

8 in this section shall be construed to prohibit the Secretary 

9 from removing a condition placed on a permit pursuant 

10 to subsection (c). 

11 "§ 80203. Continuing permitting requirements 

12 "(a) NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.-A permit hold13 er shall, in a timely manner, notifY the Secretary if14 "(1) a permitted space-based remote sensing 

15 system has terminated operations; or 

16 "(2) a catastrophic event has occurred to a 

17 space-based remote sensing system, such as the un18 planned destruction of snch system. 

19 "(b) lVIATERIAL CI~'\'GE.-Thc Secretary shall re20 quire permit holders to inform the Secretary of21 "(1) any material changes to the space-based 

22 remote sensing system or the planned operations of 

23 such system prior to launch; and 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
205 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

46 

1 "(2) any material anomalies or departures from 

2 the planned operations during the course of oper3 ations. 

4 "(c) UPDATE TO PERMIT.-Not later than 14 days 

5 after the date of receipt of information regarding a mate6 rial change pursuant to subsection (b), the Secretary shall 

7 make a determination of whether such material change is 

8 substantial enough to warrant additional review under sec9 tion 80202(b). Not later than 60 days after a determina10 tion that such review is ·warranted, the Secretary shall 

11 complete a similar such review process for such material 

12 change as is required for a permit applicant under sueh 

13 section. 

14 "§ 80204. Permit transfer 

15 "(a) IN GENERAL.-Subject to subsections (b) and 

16 (c), the Secretary shall provide for the transfer of a permit 

17 under this chapter from the permit holder to another per18 sou to continue the operations allowed under such permit. 

19 "(b) TRA."SFER REQUES'r REQVIREMENTS.-To be 

20 eligible for a transfer under subsection (a), the permit 

21 holder shall submit to the Secretary a request that in22 eludes any identifying information regarding the trans23 feree that would be required under an initial application 

24 nuder section 80202. 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
206 

G:\CMTE\SOI5\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

47 

1 "(e) DETER:viiNATION.-Not later than 14 days after 

2 the date on which the Secretary receives a transfer request 

3 pursuant to subsection (b), the Secretary shall make a de4 termination of whether such material change is substantial 

5 enough to warrant additional review under section 

6 80202(b). Not later than 60 days after a determination 

7 that such review is warranted, the Secretary shall cornS plete a similar such review process for such transferee as 

9 is required for a permit applicant under such section. 

10 "(d) MATERIAij CHA.c'\TGE.-Any transfer of a permit 

11 under this chapter constitutes a material change under 

12 section 80203(b). 

13 "§ 80205. Agency activities 

14 "(a) UTILIZA'fiON OF FEDERAL GOVERNMENT VEHI15 CLE.-A person may apply for a permit to operate a 

16 space-based remote sensing system that utilizes, on a 

17 space-available basis, a civilian Federal Government sat18 ellite or vehicle as a platform for such system. The Sec19 retary, pursuant to this chapter, may permit such system 

20 if it meets all conditions of this chapter. 

21 "(b) AssrSTANCE.-The Secretary may offer assist22 ance to persons in finding appropriate opportunities for 

23 the utilization described in subsection (a). 

24 "(c) AGREEMENTS.-To the extent provided m ad25 vance by appropriation Acts, an agency may enter into an 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
207 

G:\CMTE\S015\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

48 

1 agreement for the utilization described in subsection (a) 

2 if such agreement is consistent with the agency's mission 

3 and statutory authority, and if the space-based remote 

4 sensing system is issued a permit by the Secretary under 

5 this chapter before commencing operation. 

6 "§ 80206. Annual reports 

7 "(a) IN GENERAh-The Secretary shall submit are8 port to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Trans9 portation of the Senate and the Committee on Science, 

10 Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives 

11 not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of 

12 the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 

13 2017, and annually thereafter, on14 "(1) the Secretary's implementation of this 

15 chapter, including16 "(A) a list of all applications received m 

17 the previous calendar year; 

18 "(B) a list of all applications that resulted 

19 in a permit; 

20 "(C) a list of all applications denied and 

21 an explanation of why each application was de22 nied, including any information relevant to the 

23 adjudication process of a request for a permit; 

24 "(D) a list of all applications that required 

25 additional information; and 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
208 

G:\CMrE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

49 

"(E) a list of all applications whose dis2 position exceeded the 60 day deadline, the total 

3 days overdue for each application that exceeded 

4 such deadline, and an explanation for the delay; 

5 and 

6 "(2) a description of all actions taken by the 

7 Secretary under the administrative authority grant8 ed by section 80301. 

9 "(b) CL..\.SSIFIED A."'NEXES.-Each report under sub10 section (a) may include classified annexes as necessary to 

11 protect the disclosure of sensitive or classified information. 

12 "§80207. Advisory Committee on Commercial Remote 

13 Sensing 

14 "(a) ESTABUSHMENT.-The Secretary shall estab15 lish an AdYisory Committee on Commercial llilmote Sens16 ing (in this section referred to as the 'Committee') con17 sisting of 15 members who shall be appointed by the Sec18 retary. 

19 "(b) CHAIR.-The Committee shall designate one 

20 member as the chair of the Committee. 

21 "(c) MKMBERSHIP.-

22 "(1) LIJVIITATION.-Members of the Committee 

23 may not be Federal Government employees or offi24 cials. 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
209 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

50 

"(2) TRAVEij EXPENSES.-Members of the 

2 Committee shall receive travel expenses, including 

3 per diem in lieu of subsistence, in accordance with 

4 the applicable provisions under subchapter I of chap5 ter 57 of title 5. 

6 "(d) TERMS.-l<Jach member of the Committee shall 

7 serve for a term of 4 years and may not serve as a member 

8 for the 2-ycar period following the date of completion of 

9 each such term. 

10 "(e) DUTIES.-The duties of the Committee shall be 

11 to12 "(1) provide information, advice, and rec13 ommendations on matters relating to the United 

14 States commercial space-based remote sensing in15 dustry; 

16 "(2) analyze the effectiveness and efficiency of 

17 the implementation of the space-based remote sens18 ing system permitting process under this chapter; 

19 "(3) provide recommendations to the Secretary 

20 and Congress on how the United States can facili21 tate and promote a robust and innovate private sec22 tor that is investing in, developing, and operating 

23 space-based remote sensing systems; 

24 " ( 4) identify any challenges the United States 

25 private sector is experiencing with the authorization 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
210 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

51 

and supervision of the operation of space-based re2 mote sensing systems under this chapter; and 

3 "(5) provide information, advice, and rec4 ommendations on matters related to the authority of 

5 the Secretary under this chapter or to private sector 

6 space activities authorized pursuant to this chapter 

7 that the Committee determines necessary. 

8 "(f) ANNUAL REPORT.-The Committee shall submit 

9 to Congress, the President, the Secretary, and the Direc1 0 tor of the Office of Space Commerce, an annual report 

11 that includes the information, analysis, findings, and rec12 ommendations described in subsection (e). 

13 "(g) SUNSET.-The Committee shall terminate on 

14 the date that is 10 years after the date on which the Com15 mittee is established. 

16 "§80208. Continuation of existing license or pending 

17 application 

18 "(a) CONTINUATION OF EXISTING LICENSE.-Any 

19 United States entity for whom a license for the operation 

20 of a space-based remote sensing system issued under sub21 chapter III of chapter 601 that is valid on the effective 

22 date of this section may23 "(1) elect to be immediately considered per24 mitted for operation under this chapter, in which 

25 case all terms and conditions of a license issued 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 {2:32 p.m.) 

{659448125) 
211 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

52 

1 under such subchapter with respect to the operation 

2 of such system shall apply for the duration of the li3 cense; or 

4 "(2) apply for a permit for operation under this 

5 chapter and may continue to operate pursuant to 

6 such license until such time as such permit is issued. 

7 "(b) RESCIND OR TRA.."<SFER OF PENDING LI8 CENSE.-An applicant with an application for a remote 

9 sensing license under subchapter III of chapter 601 that 

10 is pending on the effective date of this section may be, 

11 at the election of the applicant12 "(1) rescinded without prejudice; or 

13 "(2) transferred to the Office of Space Com14 merce and deemed to be a pending application for a 

15 permit under this chapter. 

16 "{c) EF.FECTIVE DATE.-This section shall take ef17 feet on the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment 

18 of the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise Act of 

19 2017. 

20 "§ 80209. Commercial Remote Sensing Regulatory M21 fairs Office 

22 "On the date that is 1 year after the date of enact23 ment of the American Space Commerce Free Enterprise 

24 Act of 2017, the Commercial Remote Sensing Regulatory 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
212 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

53 

Affairs Office of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

2 Administration is abolished.". 

3 SEC. 5. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS RELATED TO CER4 TIFICATION AND PERMITTING. 

5 Title 51, United States Code, is further amended by 

6 adding at the end the follo>\ring: 

7 "CHAPTER 803-ADMINISTRATIVE PROVI8 SIONS RELATED TO CERTIFICATION 

9 AND PERMITTING 

"Sec. 

"80301. Administrative authority. 

"80302. Consultation. 

"80303. Appeal of denial or condition of certification or permit. 

"80304. Exclusive authority for determination of international obligations. 

"80305. Limitation on certain agency supervision. 

"80306. Commercial exploration and use of outer space. 

"80307. Rule of construction on concuiTent application submission. 

''80308. l<'ecleral juriscliction. 

"80309. Global commons. 

"80310. Regulatory authority. 

"80311. Consultation with relevant agencies. 

"80312. Authorization of appropriations. 

10 "§ 80301. Administrative authority 

11 "(a) FUNCTIONS.-In order to carry out the respon12 sibilities specified in this subtitle, the Secretary may13 "(1) seek an order of injunction or similar judi14 cia! determination from a district court of the 

15 United States 1\rith personal jurisdiction over the 

16 certification or permit holder to terminate certifi17 cations or permits under this subtitle and to termi18 nate certified or permitted operations on an Imme19 diatc basis, if the Secretary determines that the cerg:IVHLCI060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
213 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

54 

tification or permit holder has substantially failed to 

2 comply with any provisions of this subtitle, or with 

3 any terms of a certification or permit; 

4 "(2) provide for civil penalties not to exceed 

5 $10,000 (each day of operation constituting a sepa6 rate violation) and not to exceed $500,000 in total, 

7 for8 "(A) noncompliance with the certification 

9 or permitting requirements or regulations 

10 issued under this subtitle; or 

11 "(B) the operation of a space object or 

12 space-based remote sensing system without the 

13 applicable certification or permit issued under 

14 this subtitle; 

15 "(3) compromise, modify, or remit any such 

16 civil penalty; 

17 "( 4) seize any object, record, or report, or cop18 ies of materials, documents, or records, pursuant to 

19 a warrant from a magistrate based on a showing of 

20 probable cause to believe that such object, record, or 

21 report was used, is being used, or is likely to be used 

22 in violation of this subtitle or the requirements of a 

23 certification or permit or regulation issued there24 under; and 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
214 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

55 

"(5) make investigations and inquiries con2 cerning any matter relating to the enforcement of 

3 this subtitle. 

4 "(b) REVIEW OF AGENCY ACTION.-Any holder of, 

5 or applicant for, a certification or a permit who makes 

6 a timely request for review of an adverse action pursuant 

7 to paragraph (2) or (4) ·of subsection (a) shall be entitled 

8 to adjudication by the Secretary on the record after an 

9 opportunity for any agency hearing· with respect to such 

10 adverse action. Any final action by the Secretary under 

11 this subsection shall be subject to judicial review under 

12 chapter 7 of title 5, as provided in section 80303 of this 

13 chapter. 

14 "(c) No CosT FOR CERTU'ICATION OR PERMIT.-

15 The Secretary may not impose a fee or other cost on a 

16 holder of, or applicant for17 "(1) a certification under chapter 801; or 

18 "(2) a permit under chapter 802. 

19 "(d) No AUTHORITY To SET CONDITIONS.-The 

20 Secretary may not impose a substantive condition on, or 

21 any other requirement for, the issuance of a certification 

22 or permit except as specifically provided in this subtitle. 

23 "(e) FOIA EXEMPTION.-Paragraph (3) of section 

24 552(b) of title 5 shall apply with respect to any filing re25 lating to a certification or a permit under this subtitle. 

g:\VHLC\0601171060117.141.xml 

June 1. 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
215 

G:ICMI'EISC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

56 

1 "(f) LIMITATION ON EXCEPTIONS TO ADMINISTRA2 TIVE PRocEDURES.-The exceptions under section 

3 553(a)(l), section 553(b)(B), or section 554(a)(4) of title 

4 5 shall not apply with respect to a certification or permit 

5 under this subtitle. 

6 "§ 80302. Consultation 

7 "(a) SENSE OJ<' CoNGRESS.-It is the Sense of the 

8 Congress that9 "(1) the United States Government has assets 

10 in Earth orbit critical to national security, scientific 

11 research, economic growth, and exploration; 

12 "(2) such assets represent a considerable m13 vestment of United States taxpayers; and 

14 "(3) it is in the national interest of the United 

15 States to facilitate opportunities to provide for the 

16 protection of such assets. 

17 "(b) REVIEW.-Not later than 30 days after the Sec18 retary issues a certification under chapter 801, the Sec19 retary shall review the operations of any space objects cov20 ered by the certification to determine whether the inter21 action between such operations and the operations of a 

22 Federal Government space object present a substantial 

23 risk to the physical safety of a space object operated by 

24 either party. 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.} 

(659448125} 
216 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

57 

1 "(c) REQUIREMENT TO PARTICIPATE IN CONSUJ,TA2 TION.-If the Secretary makes a determination that a sub3 stantial risk identified under subsection (b) exists, the 

4 Secretary may require that the certification holder partici5 pate in a consultation under this section. 

6 "(d) PARTIES TO A CONSULTATION.-

? "(1) IN GENERA!,.-A consultation under this 

8 section may be held, with respect to a substantial 

9 safety risk identified under subsection (b), be10 tween11 "(A) a certification holder responsible for 

12 the certified space object operations; and 

13 "(B) any entity of the Federal Government 

14 operating a potentially affected space object. 

15 "(2) PARTICIPATION.-The Secretary may not 

16 impose any requirement on a party pursuant to par17 ticipation in the consultation. 

18 "(e) MITIGATION OF SAFETY RISK.-ln carrying out 

19 a consultation, the Secretary shall20 "(1) facilitate a discussion among the parties to 

21 the consultation; 

22 "(2) encourage a mutual understanding of the 

23 safety risk; and 

24 "(3) encourage, to the maximum extent prac25 ticable, voluntary agreements between the parties to 

g:IVHLC\0601171060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
217 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

58 

1 the consultation to improve the physical safety of af2 fected space object operations or mitigate the phys3 ical safety risk. 

4 "(f) DURA'l'ION OF CONSULTATION; NOTICE.-Not 

5 later than 90 days after the Secretary requires a consulta6 tion under this section, the Secretary shall7 "(1) complete all activities related to the con8 sultation; and 

9 "(2) submit to Congress a written notification 

I 0 with respect to such consultation, that includes11 "(A) the names of each party to the con12 sultation; 

13 "(B) a description of the physical safety 

14 risk at issue; 

15 "(C) whether any voluntary agreement was 

16 made by the parties; and 

17 "(D) the content of any such agreement. 

18 "(g) RULE OF CoNSTRUCTION.-Nothing in this sec19 tion shall be construed to grant any additional authority 

20 to the Secretary to regulate, or place conditions on, any 

21 activity for which a certification or permit is required 

22 under this title. 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
218 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

59 

1 "§ 80303. Appeal of denial or condition of certifi2 cation or permit 

3 "An applicant who is denied a certification under sec4 tion 80103(b)(2)(B), an applicant who is denied a permit 

5 under section 80202(b)(2){B), or an applicant whose ccr6 tification or permit is conditioned pursuant to section 

7 80103(c) or section 80202{c), respectively, may appeal the 

8 denial or. placement of a condition to the Secretary. The 

9 Secretary shall affirm or reverse the denial or placement 

10 of a condition after providing the applicant notice and an 

11 opportunity to be heard. The Secretary shall dispose of 

12 the appeal not later than 60 days after the appeal is sub13 mitted. If the Secretary denies the appeal, the applicant 

14 may seek review in the United States Court of Appeals 

15 for the District of Columbia Circuit or in the court of ap16 peals of the United States for the circuit in which the per17 son resides or has its principal place of business. 

18 "§80304. Exclusive authority for determination of 

19 international obligations 

20 "Except for the Secretary as authorized by this sub21 title, no agency may impose a requirement or make a find22 ing with regard to an international obligation of the 

23 United States pertaining to a nongovernmental entity of 

24 the United States under the Outer Space Treaty relating 

25 tog:\VHLC\060117\060117. 141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
219 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

60 

1 "(1) the operation of a space object certified 

2 under chapter 801; and 

3 "(2) the carrying out of a space debris mitiga4 tion plan of a space object for which a certification 

5 was issued under chapter 801. 

6 "§ 80305. Limitation on certain agency supervision 

7 "(a) IN GBKimAh-Not later than 1 year after the 

8 date of enactment of the American Space Commerce Free 

9 Enterprise Act of 2017, no other agency shall have the 

10 authority to authorize, place conditions on, or supervise 

11 the operation of space objects required to be certified 

12 under chapter 801 or space-based remote sensing systems 

13 required to be permitted under chapter 802 except14 "(1) the Department of Transportation with re15 spect to launch or reentry vehicle operations licensed 

16 under chapter 509; and 

17 "(2) the :B'ederal Communications Commission 

18 with respect to space stations licensed under the 

19 Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 151 et 

20 seq.); or 

21 "(b) AGRBBMBNT LEVIITA'riONS.-Nothing in this 

22 section shall be construed to prevent an agency from in23 eluding additional terms, conditions, limitations, or re24 quirements beyond those required in this subtitle in a con25 tract or other agreement withg:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
220 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

61 

"(1) the holder of a certification under chapter 

2 801 for the operation of the applicable space OQject; 

3 or 

4 "(2) the holder of a permit under chapter 802 

5 for the operation of the applicable space-based re6 mote sensing system. 

7 "§ 80306. Commercial exploration and use of outer 

8 space 

9 "To the maximum extent practicable, the President, 

10 acting through appropriate Federal agencies, shall inter11 pret and fulfill international obligations, including under 

12 the covered treaties on outer space, to minimize regula13 tions and limitations on the freedom of United States non14 governmental entities to explore and use space. 

15 "§80307. Rule of construction on concurrent applica16 tion submission 

17 "Nothing in this subtitle shall be construed to pre18 vent an applicant from submitting to the Secretary eon19 current applications for a certification under chapter 801 

20 and a permit under chapter 802. The Secretary shall pro21 vide for applications under Chapter 801 and Chapter 802 

22 to be filed concurrently or at different times, at the discre23 tion of the applicant. To the maximum extent practicable, 

24 the Secretary shall aYoid duplication of information re25 quired in concurrently filed applications. 

g:\VHLC\0601 171060117. 141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
221 

G:\CMTE\S0!5\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

62 

"§ 80308. Federal jurisdiction 

2 "The district courts shall have original jurisdiction, 

3 exclusive of the courts of the States, of any civil action 

4 resulting from the operation of a space object for which 

5 a certification or permit is required under this subtitle. 

6 "§ 80309. Global commons 

7 "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, outer 

8 space shall not be considered a global commons. 

9 "§ 80310. Regulatory authority 

10 "(a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary shall issue such 

11 regulations as are necessary to carry out this subtitle. 

12 "(b) REDUCING REGULATORY BURDEN.-In issuing 

13 regulations to carry out this subtitle, the Secretary shall 

14 avoid, to the maximum extent practicable, the placement 

15 of inconsistent, duplicative, or otherwise burdensome re16 quirements on the operations of United States nongovem17 mental entities in outer space. 

18 "§ 80311. Consultation with relevant agencies 

19 "(a) IN GENERAL.-Subject to subsection (b), the 

20 Secretary may, as the Secretary considers necessary, con21 suit with the heads of other relevant agencies in carrying 

22 out this subtitle. 

23 "(b) EXCLUSIVE AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY.-

24 The consultation authority provided by subsection (a) 

25 shall not be interpreted to alter the exclusive authority of 

26 the Secretary to authorize, place conditions on, and superg:\VHLC\0601171060117 .141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
222 

G:\CMIE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

63 

vise the operation of space objects under chapter 801 and 

2 space-based remote sensing systems under chapter 802, 

3 as provided in and subject to the limitations of section 

4 80305. 

5 "§ 80312. Authorization of appropriations 

6 "There are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 

7 to the Office of Space Commerce for fiscal year 2018 to 

8 carry out this subtitle.". 

9 SEC. 6. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS. 

10 (a) TABLE OF CHAPTERS.-The table of chapters of 

11 title 51, United State Code, is amended by adding· at the 

12 end the follo·wing: 

"Subtitle VIII-Authorization and Supervision of 

Nongovernmental Space Activities 

"801. Certification of Operation of Space Objects .............. 80101. 

"802. Permitting of Space-Based Remote Sensing Systems ............................................................................ 80201. 

"803. Administrative Provisions Related to Certification 

and Permitting ...................................................... 80301.". 

13 (b) REPEALS.-

14 (1) IN GENERAh-Title 51, United States 

15 Code, is amended as follows: 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

g:\VHLC\0601171060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(A) Subchapter III of chapter 601 IS repealed. 

(B) Section 60147 is repealed. 

(C) The table of sections for chapter 601 

is amended by striking the item relating to section 60147. 

(659448125) 
223 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_OOZ.XML 

64 

(D) The table of sections for chapter 601 

2 is amended by striking the items relating to 

3 subchapter III. 

4 (2) EFFECTIVE DATE.-The amendments made 

5 by paragraph (1) shall take effect on the date that 

6 is 1 year after the date of enactment of this Aet. 

7 (c) TECHNICAl, CORRECTIONS.-

8 (1) IN GENERAL.-Title 51, United States 

9 Code, is amended10 (A) in seetion 20302(e)(2), by striking 

11 "means has the meaning" and inserting "has 

12 the meaning"; 

13 (B) in seetion 50702{e)(5), by striking 

14 "Spaee-Based Position" and inserting "Spaee15 Based Positioning"; and 

16 (C) in seetion 71102(1), by striking 

17 "traeking device" and inserting "tracking de18 viee to". 

19 (2) CHAPTER 513.-The table of chapters of 

20 title 51, United State Code, is amended by striking 

21 the item related to ehapter 513 and inserting the 

22 following: 

"513. Space Resource Commercial Exploration and Utilization ......................................................................... 51301.". 

23 (3) CHAPTER 701.-The table of ehapters of 

24 title 51, United State Code, is amended by striking 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
224 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

65 

1 the item related to chapter 701 and inserting the 

2 following: 

"701. Use of Space Launch System or Alternatives ............ 70101.". 

3 SEC. 7. OFFICE OF SPACE COMMERCE. 

4 Section 50702 of title 51, United States Code, IS 

5 amended6 (1) in subsection (a), by adding at the end be7 fore the period ", which shall be located in the prin8 cipal physical location of the Office of the Secretary 

9 of Commerce"; 

10 (2) in subsection (b), by striking "a senior exec11 utive and shall be compensated at a level in the Sen12 ior Executive Service under section 5382 of title 5 

13 as determined by the Secretary of Commerce" and 

14 inserting "appointed by the President and confirmed 

15 by the Senate. The Director shall be the .Assistant 

16 Secretary of Commerce for Space Commerce and 

17 shall :report directly to the Secretary of Commerce."; 

18 and 

19 ( 3) in subsection (c)-

20 (A) in paragraph ( 4), by striking "and" at 

21 the end; 

22 (B) in paragraph (5), by striking the pe23 :riod at the end; and 

24 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659448125) 
225 

G:\CMTE\SC\l5\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

66 

"(6) to authorize and supervise the operations 

2 of United States nongovernmental entities in outer 

3 space, pursuant to chapter 801 of this title; 

4 "(7) to authorize and supervise the operations 

5 of space-based remote sensing systems pursuant to 

6 chapter 802 of this title; and 

7 "(8) to facilitate and promote the development 

8 of best practices among operators of space objects 

9 and space-based remote sensing systems under this 

10 subtitle to address substantial risks to the physical 

11 safety of Federal Government space objects, includ12 ing the risk of on-orbit collisions.". 

13 SEC. 8. RESTRICTION ON PREVENTING LAUNCHES AND RE14 ENTRIES OF CERTIFIED SPACE OBJECTS. 

15 Section 50904(c) of title 51, United States Code, is 

16 amended by adding at the end the following: "No launch 

17 or reentry may be prevented under this authority on the 

18 basis of national security, foreign policy, or international 

19 obligations of the United States, including under the cov20 ered treaties on outer space (as defined in section 80101) 

21 if the payload has received a certification to operate as 

22 a space object under chapter 801.". 

23 SEC. 9. REPORT ON REGISTRATION OF SPACE OBJECTS. 

24 (a) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 1 year after the 

25 date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Commerce, 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32 p.m.) 

(659446125) 
226 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

67 

1 acting through the Office of Space Commerce and in con2 sultation with the Private Space Activity Advisory Com3 mittee established under section 80109 of title 51, United 

4 States Code, shall submit to the Committee on Science, 

5 Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives 

6 and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transpor7 tation of the Senate a report on the implementation of 

8 the space object registration obligations of the United 

9 States and other countries under Article VIII of the Outer 

10 Space 'rrcaty and the Convention on Registration of Space 

11 Objects. 

12 (b) CONTENTS OF REPORT.-The report required 

13 under subsection (a) shall include14 (1) an identification of the practices and proce15 dures among countries that are members of the 

16 Outer Space Treaty and the Convention on Registra17 tion of Space Objects in implementing and com18 plying with the registration obligations contained in 

19 the treaties; 

20 (2) a description of any existing practices and 

21 procedures of the Federal Government for the reg22 istration of nongovernmental space objects; and 

23 (3) recommendations on how the registration of 

24 space objects in the United States could be improved 

25 to benefit the United States, including enabling 

g:\VHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
227 

G:\CMTE\Sa!5\SPACE\CSA_002.XML 

68 

1 United States leadership in commercial space activi2 tics. 

g:IVHLC\060117\060117.141.xml 

June 1, 2017 (2:32p.m.) 

(659448125) 
228 

G:\M\15\SMITTX\SMITTX_012.XML 

.AMENDMENT TO H.R. ___ _ 

OFFERED BY MR. SMiffi OF TExAs 

Page 1, line 4, strike "This Act" and insert "(a) 

SHORT TITLE.-This Act". 

Page 1, after line 5, insert the following: 

1 (b) '!'ABLE OF CoNTEN'rs.-The table of contents is 

2 as follows: 

Page 6, line 5, strike "CERTIFICATES" and insert 

"CERTIFICATION''. 

Page 6, line 16, strike "Executive Agency" and insert "Executive agency". 

Page 11, line 13, strike "issue a certification" and 

insert "begin issuing certifications". 

Page 11, line 17, strike "may" and insert "shall". 

Page 15, line 2, strike "60" and insert "90". 

Page 15, line 11, strike "60" and insert "90". 

Page 17, line 1, strike "60 day" and insert "90-

day". 

Page 20, line 4, strike "To" and insert "To". 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717.1 OO.xml 

June 7, 2017 (1:17 p.m.) 

(66244412) 
229 

G:IM\15\SMITTX\SMITTX_Ol2.XML 

2 

Page 21, line 24, strike "60" and insert "90". 

Page 22, line 21, strike "60" and insert "90". 

Page 23, line 3, strike "(1) IN GENERAL.-" and redesignate accordingly. 

Page 29, strike lines 1 through 10 and insert the 

following: 

1 "§ 80111. Protecting the interests of United States en2 tity space objects 

3 "The President shall4 "(1) protect the interests of United States enti5 ty exploration and use of outer space, including com6 mercia! activity and the exploitation of space re7 sources, from acts of foreign aggression and foreign 

8 harmful interference; 

9 "(2) protect mvnership rights of United States 

10 entity space oqjects and obtained space resources; 

11 and 

12 "(3) ensure that United States entities oper13 ating in outer space are given due regard.". 

Page 31, line 16, strike "may" and insert "shall". 

Page 33, line 20, strike "BASED" and insert 

"BASED". 

Page 36, line 9, strike "60" and insert "90". 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717.1 OO.xml 

June 7, 2017 (1:17 p.m.) 

(66244412) 
230 

G:\M\15\SMITIX\SMITIX_OI2.XML 

3 

Page 36, line 16, strike "60" and insert "90". 

Page 39, line 11, strike "60 day" and insert "90-

day". 

Page 42, line 6, strike "government" and insert 

"Government". 

Page 45, line 7, strike "To" and insert "To". 

Page 46, line 9, strike "60" and insert "90". 

Page 47, line 6, strike "60" and insert "90". 

Page 49, line 2, strike "60 day" and insert "90-

day". 

Page 56, line 7, strike "Sense" and insert "sense". 

Page 57, line 1, strike "To" and insert "To". 

Page 58, line 22, strike "title" and insert "subtitle". 

Page 60, line 20, strike "; or" and insert a period. 

Page 60, lines 23-24, insert ", consistent with applicable provisions of law," after "requirements". 

Page 61, line 21, strike "Chapter" each place it appears and insert "chapter". 

Page 62, line 20, strike "may" and insert "shall". 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717.1 OO.xml 

June 7, 2017 (1:17 p.m.) 

(66244412) 
231 

G:\M\15\SMIITX\SMTITX_Ol2.XML 

4 

Page 63, in the matter following line 12, strike "of 

Operation of" and insert "to Operate". 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717.1 OO.xml 

June 7, 2017 (1:17 p.m.) 

(66244412) 
232 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002_ANS.XML 

AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE 

TO H.R. 

OFFERED BY Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON OF 

TEXAS 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 

following: 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the "Facilitating Commer3 cial Enterprise in Space Act of 2017". 

4 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

5 Congress finds the following: 

6 (1) The United States has a robust and innova7 tive private sector that is investing in, developing, 

8 and placing into outer space, spacecraft and pay9 loads. 

10 (2) Private sector activities in space, respon11 sibly carried out, can further the national security, 

12 foreign policy, and economic interests of the United 

13 States. 

14 (3) An efficient and transparent licensing proc15 ess for private remote sensing space systems is bene16 ficial for economic grmvth and the maintenance of 

17 national security and international obligations. 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717.062.xm! 

June 7, 2017 (11:46 a.m.) 

(66219617) 
233 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002_ANS.XML 

2 

( 4) Authorization and supervision mechanisms 

2 for planned private sector activities in outer space 

3 could be improved to address existing gaps in such 

4 mechanisms for nontraditional endeavors as well as 

5 to mitigate administrative burdens on private sector 

6 entities. 

7 SEC. 3. MISSION CERTIFICATION. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.-Chapter 509 of title 51, United 

9 States Code, is amended10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

(1) in section 50902-

(A) by redesignating paragraphs (21) 

through (25) as paragraphs (23) through (27), 

respectively; 

(B) by redesignating paragraphs (12) 

15 through (20) as paragraphs (13) through (21), 

16 respectively; 

17 (C) by inserting after paragraph (11) the 

18 following: 

19 "(12) 'mission' means the operation of a space 

20 object, with or ·without human occupants, in outer 

21 space, including on the Moon and other celestial 

22 bodies."; and 

23 (D) by inserting after paragraph (21) (as 

24 so redesignated) the following: 

25 "(22) 'space object'-

g:\VHLC\060717\060717.062.xml 

June 7, 2017 (11:46 a.m.) 

(66219617) 
234 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002_ANS.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:IVHLC\060717\060717.062.xml 

June 7, 2017 (11:46 a.m.) 

Is-· 

3 

"(A) means-

"(i) a human-made object located in 

outer space, including on the Moon and 

other celestial bodies, with or without 

human occupants, that was launched from 

Earth, such as a satellite or a spacecraft, 

including component parts of the object; 

and 

"(ii) all items carried on such object 

that are intended for use in outer space 

outside of, and independent of, the operation of such object; 

"(B) includes any human-made object that 

"(i) manufactured or assembled m 

outer space; and 

"(ii) intended for operations m outer 

space outside of, and independent of, the 

operations of such object in which the 

manufacturing or assembly occurred; and 

"(C) does not include-

"(i) an article on board a space object 

that is only intended for use inside the 

space object; 

(66219617) 
235 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002_ANS.XML 

4 

1 "(ii) an article manufactured or proc2 essed in outer space that is a material; or 

3 "(iii) an article intended for use out4 side of a space object as pmt of the cer5 tified operations of the space object."; 

6 (2) in section 50919(g)(l)-

7 (A) in subparagraph (A), by inserting 

8 "mission," after "reentry site,"; and 

9 (B) in subparagraph (B), by inserting 

10 "mission," after "operation,"; and 

11 (3) by inserting after section 50923 the fol12 lowing: 

13 "§ 50924. Mission certification 

14 "(a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary of Transpor15 tation, in coordination "'ith appropriate executive agen16 cies, is authorized to grant certifications to conduct mis17 sions as provided in this section. The Secretary shall grant 

18 such certifications to the extent consistent ·with the inter19 national obligations, foreign policy, and national security 

20 interests of the United States, and with United States 

21 Government uses of outer space. Such certifications may 

22 include such conditions as the Secretary, in coordination 

23 with appropriate executive agencies, determines necessary 

24 for compliance with United States international obliga25 tions, the preservation of the foreign poliey interests and 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717.062.xml 

June 7, 2017 (11:46 a.m.) 

(66219617) 
236 

G:\CMTE\SOI5\SPACE\CSA_002_ANS.XML 

5 

1 national security of the United States, and the protection 

2 of United States Government uses of outer space. 

3 "(b) PROHIBITION ON 0PERA1'ING WITHOUT CER4 TIFICATION.-

5 "(1) IN GENERAL.-Except as provided in para6 graph (2), no person that is subject to the jurisdic7 tion or control of the United States may, directly or 

8 through any subsidiary or affiliate, conduct a mis9 sion without a certification under this section. 

10 "(2) EXEMPTIONS.-The following classes of 

11 mtsswns are exempt from the prohibition under 

12 paragraph (1): 

13 "(A) A launch, reentry, operation of a 

14 launch vehicle or reentry vehicle, or other space 

15 activity the Government carries out for the Gov16 ernment, or planning or policies related to such 

17 launch, reentry, operation, or activity, subject 

18 to section 50919(g)(l). 

19 "(B) An activity for which a license is re20 quired by the Department of Transportation 

21 under chapter 509 of this title, by the Federal 

22 Communications Commission under the Com23 munications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 151 ct 

24 seq.), or by the Secretary of Commerce under 

25 chapter 601 of this title, which shall be suffig:\ VHLCI060717\060717.062.xml 

June 7, 2017 (11:46 a.m.) 

(66219617) 
237 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002_ANS.XML 

6 

1 cient to fulfill the obligations of the United 

2 States under the Treaty on Principles Gov3 erning the Activities of States in the Explo4 ration and Use of Outer Space, including the 

5 Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (signed at 

6 Washington, Moscow, and l..Jondon on January 

7 27, 1967, ratified by the United States on Oc8 tober 10, 1967; 18 UST 2410). 

9 "(C) A mission, or aspect thereof, con10 ducted for or with one or more executive agen11 cies, unless the Secretary and the relevant head 

12 of each such agency determine that a certifi13 cation under this section is required to provide 

14 effective supervision of such mission or aspect. 

15 "(c) APPLICATION.-An applicant for a certification 

16 under this section shall submit to the Secretary an appli17 cation containing such information and affirmations as the 

18 Secretary may require, at such time and iu such manner 

19 as the Secretary may require. 

20 "(d) HARMFUL CoNTAJHINATION.-

21 "(1) REVIEW.-The Secretary, m coordination 

22 with the Administrator of the National Aeronautics 

23 and Space Administration, shall review the informa24 tion and affirmations submitted by an applicant for 

25 a certification pursuant to subsection (c) to assess 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717.062.xml 

June 7, 2017 (11:46 a.m.) 

(66219617) 
238 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002_ANS.XML 

7 

1 the adequacy of the proposed mission to avoid harm2 ful contamination of the Moon and other celestial 

3 bodies and to avoid adverse changes in the environ4 ment of the Earth resulting from the introduction of 

5 extraterrestrial matter. If the Secretary, in coordina6 tion with the Administrator of the National Aero7 nautics and Space Administration, determines that 

8 the proposed mission will not adequately avoid such 

9 harmful occurrences, the Secretary may require the 

10 applicant to submit additional information, place 

11 conditions on the approval of such application, or 

12 deny such application. 

13 "(2) TECHNICAl, ASSIST~"JCE.-As part of the 

14 review under paragraph (1), the Administrator of 

15 the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

16 shall provide, without seeking reimbursement, as re17 quested by the applicant, technical assistance to the 

18 proposed mission on avoidance of such harmful oc19 currences. 

20 "(e) MITIGATION OF SPACE DEBRIS.-The Sec21 retary, in coordination with appropriate executive agen22 cies, shall revie'v the information and affirmations sub23 mitted by an applicant for a certification pursuant to sub24 section (c) to assess the adequacy of the proposed mission 

25 to mitigate space debris in the conduct and termination 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717.062.xml 

June 7, 2017 (11:46 a.m.) 

(66219617) 
239 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002_ANS.XML 

8 

1 of the mission. If the Secretary determines that the pro2 posed mission will not adequately mitigate space debris, 

3 the Secretary may require the applicant to submit addi4 tional information, place conditions on the approval of 

5 such application, or deny such application. 

6 "(f) LIKELIHOOD OF POTENTIAL COI,LISIONS.-:-The 

7 Secretary, in coordination with appropriate executive 

8 agencies, shall review the planned operational trajectories 

9 of each proposed mission for a certification under this sec10 tion to determine the likelihood of potential collisions. The 

11 Secretary shall notify an applicant of any such potential 

12 collision that the Secretary determines is likely to occur. 

13 "(g) MISSION CERTIFICATION REGISTRY.-

14 "(1) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary shall main15 tain a registry of certifications issued pursuant to 

16 this section and the information contained therein. 

17 "(2) MATERIAL CHANGE.-The Secretary is au18 thorized to require the holder of a certification under 

19 this section to provide updated information on the 

20 mission covered by such certification on a periodic 

21 basis and whenever such mission experiences a mate22 rial change to operations that would affect any affir23 mation or information originally submitted in sup24 port of such certification pursuant to subsection (c). 

25 In the event of a material change to the mission, the 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717 .062.xml 

June 7, 2017 (11 :46 a.m.) 

(66219617) 
240 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002_ANS.XML 

9 

1 Secretary, in coordination ''lith appropriate executive 

2 agencies, shall make such modifications to the cer3 tification of the mission as the Secretary determines 

4 is necessary for compliance with United States interS national obligations, preservation of the foreign pol6 icy interests and national security of the United 

7 States, and the protection of United States Govern8 ment uses of outer space. 

9 "(3) REVOCATION.-ln the event that the See10 retary determines that there is no practicable way 

11 for a mission to maintain the compliance, preserva12 tion, or protection described in paragraph (2), the 

13 Secretary is authorized to revoke the certification of 

14 such mission.". 

15 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.-The table of sec16 tions for chapter 509 of title 51, United States Code, is 

17 amended by adding at the end the following new item: 

"51924. Mission certification.". 

18 SEC. 4. COMMERCIAL REMOTE SENSING AMENDMENTS. 

19 (a) Section 50702 of title 51, United States Code, 

20 is amended21 (1) in subsection (a), by adding at the end be22 fore the period ", which shall be located in the prin23 eipal physical location of the Office of the Secretary 

24 of Commerce"; 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717.062.xml 

June 7, 2017 {11 :46 a.m.) 

{66219617) 
241 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_002_ANS.XML 

10 

1 (2) in subsection (b), by adding at the end the 

2 follo~'ing: "The Director shall report to the Deputy 

3 Secretary of Commerce."; and 

4 (3) in subsection (c)-

5 (A) in paragraph ( 4) by striking "and" at 

6 the end; 

7 (B) in paragraph (5) by striking the period 

8 at the end and inserting "; and"; and 

9 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

10 "(6) to conduct the activities authorized in sub11 chapter III of chapter 601.". 

12 (b) Section 60121 of title 51, United States Code, 

13 is amended14 (1) in subsection (a) by adding at the end the 

15 following: 

16 "(3) LIMI'fATION ON I,ICENSING.-Sensing 

17 technology that is not capable of imaging the Earth 

18 shall not be subject to the licensing requirements of 

19 this subchapter. 

20 "(4) Co:MPLifu'iCE DETERMINATION.-

21 "(A) IN GENERAL.-Granting of a license 

22 under this subchapter shall be deemed a deter23 mination that the license application addresses 

24 the national security concerns of the United 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717 .062.xml 

June 7, 2017 (11 :46 a.m.) 

(66219617) 
242 

G:ICMfEIS015\SPACE\CSA_002_ANS.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717.062.xml 

June 7, 2017 (11 :46 a.m.) 

11 

States and fulfills applicable international obligations. 

"(B) .MATERIAL CHfu"\'GE.-ln the event of 

a material change to the operations of a system 

licensed under this subchapter that would affect 

any affirmation or information originally submitted in support of the license, the Secretary, 

in coordination with the heads of appropriate 

Executive agencies, shall make such modifications to the license as the Secretary determines 

are necessary for-

"(i) compliance with United States 

international obligations; and 

"(ii) the national security of the 

United States. 

"(C) REVOCATION.-With respect to a material change described in subparagraph (B), if 

the Secretary determines that there is no practicable way for the licensed operations to, due 

to such material change, maintain compliance 

with United States international oblig·ations or 

to address national security concerns, the Secretary is authorized to revoke the license."; and 

(2) in subsection (c)-

(66219617) 
243 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\CSA_OOZ_ANS.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

12 

(A) by striking "120" and inserting "75"; 

and 

(B) by inserting "The deadline for final action may be extended an additional 30 days at 

the request of the applicant." after "receipt of 

such application.". 

7 SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

8 There are authorized to be appropriated to the Office 

9 of Space Commerce of the Department of Commerce 

10 $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2018. 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717.062.xml 

June 7, 2017 (11 :46 a.m.) 

(66219617) 
244 

G:\M\15\BRIDEN\BRIDEN_OOS.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 

OFFERED BY MR. BRIDENSTINE OF OKLAHOMA 

At the end of the bill, add the following: 

1 SEC._. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT. 

2 Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 

3 of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States 

4 shall submit to Congress a report on removing the Office 

5 of Commercial Space Transportation from under the juris6 diction of the Federal Aviation Administration and rees7 tablishing the Office under the jurisdiction of the Sec8 retary of Transportation. Such report shall include9 (1) the identification of key practices for sue10 cessful organizational transitions; 

11 (2) the advantages and disadvantages of the re12 moval and reestablishment with respect to the ability 

13 of the Office to continue to coordinate and commu14 nicate with Federal Aviation Administration on air15 space issues; and 

16 (3) the identification of any issues that are pre17 venting the Office from fully carrying out its statu18 tory mandate, and if such issues would persist reg:IVHLC\060517\060517 .217 .xml 

June 5, 2017 (5:00 p.m.) 

(66218714) 
245 

G:\M\15\BRIDEN\BRIDEN_OOS.XML 

2 

1 gardless of organizational location of the Office with2 in the Department of Transportation. 

g:\VHLC\060517\060517.217.xml 

June 5, 2017 (5:00 p.m.) 

(66218714) 
246 

G:\M\15\PERLMU\PERLMU_OIO.XML 

1 

2 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 

OFFERED BY MR. PERLMUTTER OF COLORADO 

Page 27, line 10, strike "and". 

Page 27, line 12, insert "and" after "outer space;". 

Page 27, after line 12, insert the following: 

"(D) with access to adequate, predictable, 

and reliable radio frequency spectrum;". 

g:\VHLC\060717\060717.045.xml 

June 7, 2017 (11 :20 a.m.) 

(66242211) 
(247) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUP ON H.R. 2763, 

SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION 

RESEARCH AND SMALL BUSINESS 

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER 

IMPROVEMENTS ACT OF 2017 

THURSDAY, JUNE 22, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. 

Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of 

the Committee at any time. Pursuant to Committee Rule II(e) and 

House Rule XI(2)(h)(4), the Chair announces that he may postpone 

roll call votes. 

Today, we meet to consider H.R. 2763, the Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer Improvements Act of 2017. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 2763, and the clerk will 

report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 2763, a bill to amend the Small Business Act, to improve the Small Business Innovation Research program and 

Small Business Technology Transfer program, and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill will be considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point, and I’ll recognize myself for an opening statement. 

First of all, I want to thank the gentleman from California, Mr. 

Knight, for introducing this legislation, which makes key improvements to the SBIR and STTR programs. 

The SBIR Program was signed into law by President Reagan in 

1982 to help spur innovation and increase small business participation in Federal research and development activity. Since its inception, this competitive grant program has funded more than 100,000 

projects across America and has helped spawn familiar companies 

such as Qualcomm, Sonicare, and Symantec. 

SBIR and STTR award winners also have created innovations 

critical to our national science and security efforts, such as parts 
248 

for the Mars Rover for NASA and a unique cockpit airbag system 

to protect Army helicopter pilots. 

Today 11 Federal agencies provide funding to small businesses 

through SBIR, and five agencies provide funding through STTR, a 

total of nearly $3 billion this fiscal year. That’s over 66 times greater than the $45 million spent under the original program in 1983. 

Grant recipients have contributed to the country’s scientific and 

technical knowledge, generating hundreds of patents and many 

contributions to applied science and knowledge. These small businesses have expanded innovation and helped strengthen our economy by creating jobs, thousands of good-paying jobs every year. 

However, as we heard at a joint hearing conducted with the 

Small Business Committee last month, there is still room for improvement. For example, the General Accountability Office’s recent 

review of SBIR and STTR raised red flags about irregular and incomplete reports to Congress by the SBA and participating agencies. 

These are not new problems, and given the exponential growth 

in the program, it is long past time for them to be remedied. These 

assessment tools are crucial to ensure that taxpayers get maximum 

returns on their investment. We also need to keep in mind that 

these programs are intended to support innovators and entrepreneurs engaged in early stage research and development. We 

need to update SBIR and STTR in order to reflect a fast-changing 

business environment. Deficiencies in SBIR-STTR efficiency and effectiveness mean lost opportunities for innovative small enterprises. 

The legislation before our Committee addresses both of these 

needs, and I congratulate Mr. Knight for developing such a responsible, forward-looking bill. It is appropriate to note that Mr. Knight 

also serves on the Small Business Committee as Chairman of the 

Subcommittee on Contracting and Workforce, which shares jurisdiction over SBIR and STTR. He was a leader for the timely reauthorization of the SBIR and STTR programs last year, which assured no interruption in Federal support for continuing innovation 

and commercialization from taxpayer-supported basic research. 

Last week, the House Small Business Committee unanimously 

approved an amended version of H.R. 2763. 

Today, I look forward to considering a handful of good reform 

and prioritization amendments, followed by our Committee’s approval, which will move this legislation one step closer to House 

floor action and eventual enactment. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

I thank the gentleman from California, Mr. Knight, for introducing this important 

legislation that makes key improvements to the SBIR and STTR programs. 

The SBIR Program was signed into law by President Reagan in 1982 to help spur 

innovation and increase small business participation in federal research and development activity. 

Since its inception, this competitive grant program has funded more than 100,000 

projects across America and has helped spawn familiar companies such as 

Qualcomm, Sonicare, and Symantec. 

SBIR and STTR award winners also have created innovations critical to our national science and security efforts, such as parts for the Mars Rover for NASA and 

a unique cockpit airbag system to protect Army helicopter pilots. 

Today 11 federal agencies provide funding to small businesses through SBIR, and 

five agencies provide funding through STTR - a total of nearly $3 billion this fiscal 
249 

year. That’s over 66 times greater than the $45 million spent under the original program in 1983. 

Grant recipients have contributed to the country’s scientific and technical knowledge, generating hundreds of patents and many contributions to applied science and 

knowledge. 

These small businesses have expanded innovation and helped strengthen our 

economy by creating thousands of good-paying jobs each year. 

However, as we heard at a joint hearing conducted with the Small Business Committee last month, there is still room for improvement. 

For example, the General Accountability Office’s recent review of SBIR and STTR 

raised red flags about irregular and incomplete reports to Congress by the SBA and 

participating agencies. 

These are not new problems, and given the exponential growth in the program, 

it is long past time for them to be remedied. These assessment tools are crucial to 

ensure that taxpayers get maximum returns on their investment. 

We also need to keep in mind that these programs are intended to support 

innovators and entrepreneurs engaged in early-stage research and development. 

We need to update SBIR and STTR in order to reflect a fast-changing business 

environment. Deficiencies in SBIR-STTR efficiency and effectiveness mean lost opportunities for innovative small enterprises. 

The legislation before our Committee addresses both of these needs, and I congratulate Mr. Knight for developing such a responsible, forward-looking bill. 

It is appropriate to note that Mr. Knight also serves on the Small Business Committee as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Contracting and Workforce, which 

shares jurisdiction over SBIR and STTR. 

He was a leader for the timely reauthorization of the SBIR and STTR programs 

last year, which assured no interruption in federal support for continuing innovation 

and commercialization from taxpayer-supported basic research. 

Last week, the House Small Business Committee unanimously approved an 

amended version of HR 2763. 

Today, I look forward to considering a handful of good reform and prioritization 

amendments, followed by our Committee’s approval, which will move this legislation 

one-step closer to House floor action and eventual enactment. 

Chairman SMITH. I now recognize the gentlewoman from Texas, 

Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson, for her opening statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Chairman, for holding this 

markup of H.R. 2763, the Small Business Innovation Research and 

Small Business Technology Transfer Improvement Act of 2017. 

H.R. 2763 was introduced and previously marked up by our colleagues on the Small Business Committee. This morning, Members 

of the Science Committee have an opportunity to debate and 

amend this important legislation. 

The Small Business Innovation Research program, or SBIR, was 

created in Congress—by Congress in 1982. Since then, it has grown 

in size from $45 million to over $2.2 billion, and expanded to include the Small Business Technology Transfer, or the STTR program. 

The mission of the SBIR program is four-fold: To stimulate technological innovation, to use small businesses to help meet Federal 

research and development needs, to increase private sector commercialization of the results of federally funded research, and to 

foster the participation of women-and minority-owned firms in 

technological innovation. 

I believe the evidence shows SBIR to be an extremely valuable 

program that we must continue to support and strengthen. However, I continue to believe we must consider the SBIR in the context of our broader Federal R&D investments. 

In December 2016, Congress provided certainty for the SBIR program for the next 5 years by extending its authorization through 
250 

Fiscal Year 2022 at the current allocation level. I was pleased we 

were able to accomplish that small but important task. 

As grant proposal success rates at NSF and NIH sink to historical lows for some programs, we should be very wary of any actions 

that would further destabilize the basic research enterprise that 

serves as the foundation for our Nation’s innovation and economic 

growth. I would be very happy to see SBIR and STTR grow in addition to funding for Federal R&D overall, and I’m eager to work 

with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to make that happen. 

I will also note that the SBIR program has been evaluated in two 

rounds of reports by the National Academies. Overall, the Academies have found that agencies are meeting the first three objectives of the program, but falling short on the fourth objective of expanding participation of women and minorities. We must continue 

to push agencies on this objective. Our Nation’s capacity to innovate will deteriorate rapidly if we keep excluding a large and growing percentage of our population from technological innovation and 

entrepreneurship. 

This morning, Members on both sides are preparing to offer substantive amendments to the Small Business Committee’s introduced bill. We will then have to reconcile any differences with the 

Small Business Committee’s amendments. 

While there will be policy issues on which we have disagreements, H.R. 2763 is a good bill, and I’m pleased to be able to work 

closely with the Chairman and my other Republican colleagues to 

advance it. I believe we can get to an agreement with the Small 

Business Committee and bring this bill to the House floor. 

I thank you again, Chairman Smith, for holding this markup and 

for making this a bipartisan and transparent process. I hope we 

can do more of this in the coming weeks. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you Chairman Smith for holding this markup of H.R. 2763, the Small 

Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer Improvements Act of 2017. H.R. 2763 was introduced and previously marked up by our colleagues on the Small Business Committee. This morning, Members of the Science 

Committee have an opportunity to debate and amend this important legislation. 

The Small Business Innovation Research Program, or SBIR, was created by Con- gress in 1982. Since then, it has grown in size from $45 million to over $2.2 billion, 

and expanded to include the Small Business Technology Transfer, or STTR, Program. The mission of the SBIR program is four-fold: To stimulate technological innovation, to use small businesses to help meet federal research and development 

needs, to increase private sector commercialization of the results of federally funded 

research, and to foster the participation of women and minority owned firms in technological innovation. 

I believe the evidence shows SBIR to be an extremely valuable program that we 

must continue to support and strengthen. However, I continue to believe we must 

consider SBIR in the context of our broader Federal R&D investments. 

In December 2016, Congress provided certainty for the SBIR program for the next 

5 years by extending its authorization through Fiscal Year 2022 at the current allocation level. I was pleased we were able to accomplish that small but important 

task. As grant proposal success rates at NSF and NIH sink to historical lows for 

some programs, we should be very wary of any actions that would further destabilize the basic research enterprise that serves as the foundation for our nation’s 

innovation and economic growth. I would be very happy to see SBIR and STTR grow 

in addition to funding for Federal R&D overall, and I am eager to work with my 

colleagues on both sides of the aisle to make that happen. I will also note that the 

SBIR Program has been evaluated in two rounds of reports by The National Academies. Overall, the Academies have found that agencies are meeting the first three 

objectives of the program, but falling short on the fourth objective of expanding par-
251 

ticipation of women and minorities. We must continue to push agencies on this objective. Our nation’s capacity to innovate will deteriorate rapidly if we keep excluding a large and growing percentage of our population from technological innovation 

and entrepreneurship. 

This morning, Members on both sides are preparing to offer substantive amendments to the Small Business Committee’s introduced bill. We will then have to reconcile any differences with the Small Business Committee’s amendments. While 

there will be policy issues on which we have disagreements, H.R. 2763 is a good 

bill, and I am pleased to be able to work closely with the Chairman and my other 

Republican colleagues to advance it. I believe we can get to an agreement with the 

Small Business Committee and bring this bill to the House Floor. 

Thank you again, Chairman Smith, for holding this markup and for making this 

a bipartisan and transparent process. I hope we can do more of this in future 

months. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thanks, Ms. Johnson, for that nice opening 

statement. 

The gentleman from California, Mr. Knight, the author of the 

bill, is recognized for an opening statement as well. 

Mr. KNIGHT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

H.R. 2763 is a bipartisan bill that amends the Small Business 

Act to improve the Small Business Innovation Research, or SBIR, 

and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs. 

Small businesses drive our economy and are key to America’s 

global leadership in innovation. Small businesses are more nimble, 

can respond to market changes more rapidly than bigger counterparts, and make the United States more agile in the world economy. 

The SBIR and STTR programs have proven to be very successful 

at driving small business participation in Federal R&D activities, 

and solving government agency problems, from protecting soldiers 

in the field to helping eradicate malaria. 

Last year the Science Small Business Committees worked with 

the House and Senate Armed Services Committees to include a 5- 

year extension of the SBIR and STTR programs. This provided 

small businesses and the participating agencies alike with the confidence and security to know that these popular programs will continue to be there through 2022. 

Last month, the Small Business Subcommittee on Contracting 

and Workforce that I chair held a joint hearing with the Science 

Research and Technology Subcommittee to look at recommendations for making minor adjustments to improve the SBIR and 

STTR. H.R. 2763 takes some of those recommendations and 

strengthens the program in five ways. 

First, the bill insists on agency accountability, including several 

hard reporting deadlines for participating agencies and for the 

Small Business Administration (SBA) to provide Congress with better information and a greater grasp of the programs’ strengths and 

weaknesses. 

Second, the legislation clarifies congressional intent of the previous reauthorization to ensure that taxpayers reap the benefits of 

the SBIR and STTR programs by tying them to long-term projects 

at the DOD. 

Third, the legislation extends a popular pilot program that would 

allow all participating agencies to award a phase II contract if the 

agency finds that the small business concern has already completed 

work typically done in that phase I. 
252 

Fourth, it makes permanent the option for participating agencies 

to establish Commercialization Readiness Programs (CRPs). As a 

pilot program, CRPs have shown to provide much needed assistance to small firms nearing the completion of the process and have 

helped advance technology to the commercialization phase. 

And last, it extends a provision to allow participating agencies to 

utilize 3 percent of their allocation for administrative functions, increase waste, fraud, and abuse efforts, and conduct outreach in an 

effort to bring more companies into the SBIR and STTR world. 

It’s important to note that while the SBIR and STTR programs provide an average of $3 billion in awards to small firms annually, 

it does so without direct appropriations. These programs simply 

provide that approximately 3.65 percent of already appropriated 

extramural R&D dollars be provided for small businesses through 

these programs. 

I look forward to working with my colleagues on both the Science 

Committee and the Small Business Committee to refine the bill, 

and move it to the floor for a vote. 

I want to thank the Chairman, Small Business Chairman 

Chabot, Chairman Smith for his leadership and supporting this opportunity, and I yield back the balance of my time. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. KNIGHT

H.R. 2763 is a bi-partisan bill that amends the Small Business Act (Act), to improve the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Programs. 

Small Businesses drive our economy and are key to America’s global leadership 

in innovation. Small Businesses are more nimble, can respond to market changes 

more rapidly than their bigger counterparts, and make the United States more agile 

in the world economy. 

The SBIR and STTR programs have proven very successful at driving small business participation in federal R&D activities, and solving government agency problems - from protecting soldiers in the field to helping eradicate malaria. 

Last year the Science Small Business Committees worked with the House and 

Senate Armed Services Committees to include a 5 year extension of the SBIR and 

STTR programs. This provided small businesses and the participating agencies alike 

with the confidence and security to know that these popular programs will continue 

to be there, at least through 2022. 

Last month, the Small Business Subcommittee on Contracting and Workforce that 

I chair held a joint hearing with the Science Research and Technology Subcommittee to look at recommendations for making minor adjustments to improve 

the SBIR and STTR programs 

H.R. 2763 takes some of those recommendations and strengthens the program in 

five ways. 

First, the bill insists on agency accountability, including several hard reporting 

deadlines for participating agencies and for the Small Business Administration 

(SBA) to provide Congress with better information and a greater grasp of the programs’ strengths and weaknesses. 

Second, the legislation clarifies congressional intent of the previous reauthorization to ensure that taxpayers reap the benefits of the SBIR and STTR programs by 

tying them to long-term projects at the Department of Defense. 

Third, the legislation extends a popular pilot program that would allow all participating agencies to award a Phase II contract if the agency finds that the small business concern has already completed work typically done during Phase I. 

Fourth, it makes permanent the option for participating agencies to establish 

Commercialization Readiness Programs (CRPs). As a pilot program, CRPs have 

shown to provide much needed assistance to small firms nearing the completion of 

the process and have helped advance technology to the commercialization phase. 

Fifth, it extends a provision to allow participating agencies to utilize 3 percent of 

their allocation for administrative functions, increase waste, fraud, and abuse efforts, and conduct outreach in an effort to bring more companies into the SBIR and 

STTR world. 
253 

It is important to note that while the SBIR and STTR programs provide an average of $3 billion in awards to small firms annually, it does so without a direct appropriation. These programs simply provide that approximately 3.65 percent of already appropriated extramural R&D dollars be reserved for small businesses 

through these programs. 

I look forward to working with my colleagues on both the Science Committee and 

the Small Business Committee to refine the bill, and move it to the floor for a vote. 

Thank you Mr. Chairman for your support and this opportunity, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Knight. 

We will now proceed with amendments in the order listed on the 

roster. The first amendment is a Manager’s Amendment, and the 

clerk will report it. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 2763 offered by Mr. Smith of 

Texas. 

Chairman SMITH. The amendment is considered as read, and I’ll 

recognize myself to explain the amendment. 

This amendment includes several amendments that the Small 

Business Committee unanimously approved during their markup of 

H.R. 2763 last week. The amendment includes provisions that, one, 

clarify reporting deadlines and ensure Congress receives agency reports at the same time as the White House Office of Science and 

Technology Policy; two, helps SBIR and STTR grantees by increasing the portion of their award available for taking their ideas from 

concept to commercialization, creating more flexibility and funding 

guidelines for technical and business assistance grants, and expanding the number of local vendors eligible to provide services to 

awardees; and three, requires the Department of Defense to report 

to Congress any goals and incentives they devise to boost inclusion 

of SBIR and STTR develop technologies into larger programs of 

record. 

This amendment includes many good bipartisan efforts to improve the SBIR and STTR programs and strengthens the underlying bill, and I urge my colleagues to support the Manager’s 

Amendment. 

Is there any further discussion on the Manager’s Amendment? 

The gentleman from—yes—is recognized, Mr. Lipinski. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I speak in favor of the Manager’s Amendment just quickly. The 

second provision that you mentioned that was added in the Small 

Business Committee is the Support Startup Businesses Act of 2017, 

or Startup Act, which I introduced with Representatives Lujan and 

Schneider 2 weeks ago. It enjoys support in both the House and the 

Senate. It would increase the cap of the amount of each SBIR and 

STTR awards that can be used for technical assistance, so I think 

it’s very important to be able to pay for things like market research, intellectual property protection or participation in entrepreneurial training programs like I-Corps. So it lets small businesses 

use their funds where they know they’re needed the most, and so 

I think this would be very helpful to those who receive these 

grants. 

So I thank the Chairman for the Manager’s Amendment, and I 

yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski. 

And there is no further discussion on the amendment, the question is on agreeing to the Manager’s Amendment. 
254 

All in favor, say aye. 

And opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

The next amendment on the roster is offered by the gentleman 

from Georgia, Mr. Loudermilk, and does the gentleman wish to be 

recognized? 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Ye, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at 

the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will read the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 2763 offered by Mr. Loudermilk 

of Georgia, amendment number 001. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain the 

amendment. 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

My amendment seeks to focus the attention of the new Administrator of the Small Business Administration on the fact that the 

SBA has failed to submit a statutorily required annual SBIR/STTR 

report to Congress since 2014. 

The amendment simply states that if the SBA fails to submit the 

reports on time, the Administrator’s travel budget is frozen unless 

a statutorily required annual report is submitted to Congress. 

At the SBIR/STTR hearing several weeks ago, the GAO witness 

highlighted the SBA’s failure to provide objective information to 

Congress as a major impediment to informed decisionmaking and 

a liability in terms of congressional oversight of possible waste, 

fraud, and abuse. 

I recognize this amendment is a big hammer. However, I think 

it shows Congress is serious about its oversight role and statutory 

authority no matter which party is in charge of the Administration. 

I ask my colleagues to support me in this amendment to protect 

and preserve the authority of Congress. I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Loudermilk, and I’ll recognize 

myself in support of the amendment. 

Under the previous Administration, the SBA ignored a statutory 

mandate to report annually to Congress on the SBIR and STTR 

programs so that we can monitor their progress and conduct oversight. I trust under the new Administration and under the leadership of the new SBA Administrator, reports will be on time, but if 

not, this amendment gives the SBA plenty of incentive to follow the 

law. I’ll recognize my colleague’s support of the amendment as well. 

Is there any further discussion on the amendment? 

If not, all in favor say aye. 

All opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

The next amendment on the roster is offered by the gentleman 

from Illinois, Mr. Hultgren, and he is recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at 

the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 2763 offered by Mr. Hultgren of 

Illinois, amendment number 019. 
255 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

My amendment encourages manufacturing innovation in the 

United States by requiring Federal agencies to give a high priority 

to the SBIR and STTR programs to small businesses engaged in 

manufacturing R&D for the purpose of developing and producing 

new products and technologies in the United States. 

American manufacturing means jobs. A thriving manufacturing 

sector is vital to our economy, putting people to work and driving 

growth. Ten percent of all Illinois workers are involved in manufacturing, and 12.4 percent of Illinois’s gross domestic product is attributable to manufacturing, making up the largest share of Illinois 

GDP. Manufacturing facilities employ more than 27,000 workers 

across the 14th congressional District of Illinois, which I represent. 

United States must continue to innovate manufacturing operations, techniques and specialized products to remain globally competitive. Making manufacturing innovation a high priority in the 

SBIR and STTR programs is just one that Congress can take action 

to spur the manufacturing sector. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for your support of the amendment, 

and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Hultgren, and I’ll recognize 

myself in support of the amendment, though my comments may not 

be quite so Illinois-centric as the gentleman’s were. 

American innovation in manufacturing is critical to our economy 

and to creating the jobs of the future. The SBIR and STTR programs should make it a priority to encourage production in the 

United States and support new and innovative methods and products for manufacturing, so I urge my colleagues to support the 

amendment. 

Is there any further discussion on the amendment? 

If not, the question is on agreeing to the Hultgren amendment. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

Up next is an amendment to be offered by the gentleman from 

Louisiana, Mr. Higgins, and he is recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 2763 offered by Mr. Higgins of 

Louisiana, amendment number 016. 

Chairman SMITH. And without objection, the amendment is considered as read and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. HIGGINS. Mr. Chairman, thank you. 

My amendment ensures that Federal agencies give high priority 

to small businesses that are engaged in cybersecurity research and 

development for awarding SBIR and STTR grants. 

Every day the American government and the U.S. businesses are 

under attack from cyber threats. Cyber criminals and foreign adversaries spend every hour of every day trying to steal our valuable 

personal and government information. We must use every tool in 
256 

our arsenal to prevent, mitigate and defend against these attacks. 

Small businesses and startups are where some of the most innovative ideas and products exist for cyber warfare. 

My amendment ensures that Federal Government is harnessing 

that expertise through the SBIR and STTR programs to meet one 

of the greatest security challenges of the 21st century. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to offer this 

amendment, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Higgins. By the way, we need 

to get you some company on the front row there. 

I’ll recognize myself in support of your amendment. 

I support the gentleman’s amendment and thank him for his 

leadership on cyber and other national security issues. 

Cybersecurity is a critical national priority, and Federal agencies 

should tap the SBIR and STTR programs to find solutions. Not all 

Federal agencies involved in the SBIR and STTR programs have 

cybersecurity in their missions, so I think we can work with our 

colleagues on the Small Business Committee to refine the language 

before the bill goes to the floor. 

So I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. 

Is there any further discussion? 

If not, all in favor of Mr. Higgins’ amendment, say aye. 

No? 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

Up next is an amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois, 

Mr. Lipinski, and the gentleman is recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 2763 offered by Mr. Lipinski of 

Illinois, amendment number 025. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman, this amendment would build on the 

SBIR/STTR program by requiring that funds be directed for a proof 

of concept partnership pilot program, essentially, a pilot for SBIR 

phase zero. The program would provide grants to innovative technology transfer programs at universities, research institutes, and 

national laboratories. 

There are many reasons why scientists may not take the initial 

steps to see if their invention or concept has potential commercialization. They may lack sufficient funding, business expertise, or 

they may not have considered the possibility that their invention 

has commercial potential. These limitation stand in the way of scientists and engineers collaborating with businesses or investors to 

take their ideas to the next level. 

This amendment would provide funding for programs that among 

other things actively seek out scientific discoveries with commercial 

potential, fund technology acceleration and validation, and provide 

entrepreneurial education to scientists and engineers. These efforts 

will improve the commercialization rate of Federal R&D, which in 

turn will create jobs and strengthen the economy. 

This amendment was formerly introduced as the Technology and 

Research Accelerating National Security and Future Economic Re-
257 

siliency, or TRANSFER Act, in the 113th Congress by Mr. Collins 

of New York and Mr. Kilmer of Washington, and passed through 

this Committee with bipartisan support but it was never enacted 

into law. Prior to the TRANSFER Act in the 2011 SBIR reauthorization, I sponsored a provision to create a phase zero pilot program at NIH. The NIH Centers for Accelerated Innovations and 

Research Evaluation and Commercialization Hubs, or REACH programs, are funded by this pilot program, and we heard about these 

during the hearing that we held on the reauthorization of this legislation of SBIR and STTR. 

The REACH program creates three Centers in Kentucky, Minnesota and New York. In their first 2 years, these three Centers 

have produced 38 patent applications filed, 14 technology licenses 

negotiated, seven companies formed, 53 SBIR/STTR proposals submitted, and 70 promising technologies in the pipeline. Perhaps 

more important than these numbers, though, are the regional innovation ecosystems these universities are helping to build. 

This amendment would help greatly expand the number of these 

types of successful centers around the country. A number of organizations including the National Venture Capital Association have 

expressed support for the TRANSFER Act. I urge the adoption of 

this amendment, which I think would be greatly helpful to the 

SBIR/STTR program and to American innovation, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski, and I’ll recognize myself in support of the amendment, and I appreciate Mr. Lipinski’s 

work on this issue over a long period of time. 

The amendment is based on the TRANSFER Act, a bipartisan 

bill that the Science Committee has passed twice. The TRANSFER 

Act helps American taxpayers see a greater return on their Federal 

R&D investments by closing the gap between federally funded 

R&D efforts and the commercialization of new products and technologies. This means new products, technologies and medicines can 

be brought to market faster, and I urge my colleagues to support 

the amendment. 

Is there any further discussion on the amendment? 

If not—the Ranking Member, Ms. Johnson, is recognized. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll make my remarks 

very brief and simply say that I do support the transfer of this innovative technology from lab to the market. It’s a good idea, I supported the last one, and I ask all of us to support the amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

The question is on the amendment. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

The next amendment is also by the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. 

Lipinski, and he is recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 2763 offered by Mr. Lipinski of 

Illinois, amendment number 035. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman recognized to explain his amendment. 
258 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The National Science Foundation’s Innovation Corps, or I-Corps 

program, was created administratively by NSF in 2011 and authorized through language I authored, the American Innovation and 

Competitiveness Act that became law last year. 

The I-Corps program offers valuable entrepreneurial education to 

scientists and engineers who are college research faculty, graduate 

students and postdoctoral fellows. The purpose is to help these individuals develop new innovative products from the world-class research they have conducted in their labs. 

As everyone on this Committee knows, I’ve been an evangelist for 

I-Corps for the past 7 years. The program has had tremendous success through the NSF and has been expanded to other agencies including DOE, NIH, DOD, USDA and DHS. It has helped create 

new entrepreneurs and new tech jobs, and it’s helping Federal taxpayers get the most out of their investment and research. 

The current I-Corps program is successful in part to its focus on 

providing specific types of education and mentoring that budding 

entrepreneurs need at this initial stage when they are first attempting to create a product based on research they have conducted in the lab. But different types of support are needed at later 

stages as a small business attempts to establish itself and progress 

toward the market. These later stages would be where a small 

business would be applying for an SBIR/STTR phase I or phase II 

grant. To help provide the needed assistance for small businesses 

receiving grants in these phases, my amendment directs the NSF 

to create I-Corps phase I and phase II. 

We know that there are existing business accelerators, university 

technology transfer programs, and training programs carried out by 

NSF and other Federal agencies that provide excellent templates 

for how to train and support early and mid-stage companies in 

achieving growth, scale and market entry. 

If my amendment were added to this bill, NSF would convene experts from around the country and from a wide range of academic, 

industry and government sectors to assemble a model curriculum 

for phase I and II assistance by taking advantage of the best practices and lessons learned from existing programs. This training 

would be paid for out of the SBIR/STTR grants and only when the 

grant recipients believe this type of training would provide a better 

chance for the business to be successful; that is, it would not be required of all grantees. 

The creation of I-Corps phase I and phase II could be a big boost 

to the goal of the SBIR program by helping small businesses create 

new jobs and helping taxpayers get a better return on their investments than SBIR/STTR grants. This is something everyone can 

and should support. 

However, the Chairman has expressed a desire to have a broader 

discussion on this issue and to gather more information before 

moving forward. So at his request, I’m willing to withdraw this 

amendment as long as the Chairman gives me his assurance that 

we will have a hearing on this topic, hopefully soon, September, 

and then moving forward legislatively on this issue. 

So I thank the Chairman and will yield to the Chairman. 
259 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski. Let me comment 

on the amendment and then respond to your suggestion as well. 

I appreciate your leadership and support of the I-Corps program. 

We do need to work with the National Science Foundation and external stakeholders on how to best leverage and build on the program’s success. I look forward to working with the gentleman about 

holding a hearing to elicit ideas on how to strengthen the I-Corps 

program, encourage more entrepreneurs and startups, and create 

jobs. 

So I thank the gentleman for working with us on this issue and 

appreciate his anticipated withdrawal of the amendment. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. But what about that hearing? 

Chairman SMITH. I will assure the gentleman that we will have 

a hearing either this millennium, this century, this decade, this 

year, this fall, and possibly in September. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. I hope that possibly is a little stronger than that, 

and if it is, I guess right now I’ll ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn. 

The next amendment on the roster is offered by the gentleman 

from California, Mr. McNerney, and he is recognized. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. I thank the Chairman. I’ve got an amendment 

at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 2763 offered by Mr. McNerney 

of California, amendment number 049. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman from California is recognized to 

explain his amendment. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Thank you. 

One of the four objectives that Congress had in mind in establishing the SBIR program was to facilitate the increased participation by minority and disadvantaged persons in the technological innovation process. To date, 11 Federal agencies participating in the 

SBIR program have had participation for minority-owned businesses vary significantly from year to year. We need to address this 

inequity. 

My amendment requires participating Federal agencies to conduct outreach to minority-serving institutions and the faculty that 

conduct research at those institutions. By doing so, we can enhance 

awareness and opportunities for mosquitoes and disadvantaged 

persons about the benefits and participates—and partnerships 

available through the SBIR and STTR programs. My amendment 

uses the definition under SBA that’s been in place for decades and 

is widely accepted. There are a great many minority-serving institutions and researchers who work at these institutions across the 

country. MSIs serve high concentrations of minority students who 

have historically been underrepresented in higher education. For 

example, CSU Stanislaw in my district is a minority-serving institution that’s been ranked as one of the best colleges in our Nation. 

Our country depends on innovation of MSIs and intellectual capital 

of its graduates. 
260 

In the 21st century, the growth of the American economy is increasingly going to be determined by the proliferation and innovation of technology and STEM-focused businesses. We should seek 

ideas and partnerships across the Nation, not limiting opportunities. It’s critical to the growth of our economy that minority-owned 

businesses are connected to the technological ecosystem. 

Basically, this amendment is simple. It just requires outreach to 

minority-serving institutions so there’s consistent participation. It 

makes sense. I urge my colleagues to support it, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. McNerney. I’ll recognize myself in opposition to the amendment, but before I go into my objections, I wonder if the gentleman from California would consider 

withdrawing the amendment with this assurance: That I am almost 100 percent confident we are going to be able to agree on language between now and the House floor because we’ve had similar 

language in past bills that this Committee has considered. As the 

gentleman knows, we had a compromise that we were discussing. 

We really ran out of time before we could reach an agreement on 

the language, but again, I’m fairly confident that we can reach an 

agreement between now and the House floor and would like not to 

oppose the gentleman’s amendment in detail right now unless he 

insists on it. And the gentleman is recognized to respond. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Well, I thank the Chairman for the offer, and 

I appreciate the effort that’s been made. I want to continue that 

on a bipartisan basis. I think we had a little trouble with a couple 

of our definitions, and I just want to make sure that the Chairman 

understands that those are critical. They’ve been in use for decades, and we need to be careful when we tread down that path. 

Chairman SMITH. I certainly understand that. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. All right. With the Chairman’s agreement in 

hand or cooperation in hand, I will agree to withdraw the amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn, and again, Mr. McNerney, I’m sure that we 

can reach some agreement on acceptable language that will be bipartisan. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. All right, Mr. Chairman. With unanimous consent, I ask to withdraw the amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. McNerney. 

The final amendment on the roster is offered by the gentleman 

from New York, Mr. Tonko, and he is recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 2763 offered by Mr. Tonko of 

New York, amendment number—— 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

This amendment expresses a sense of Congress that agencies 

should consider providing additional support for the SBIR and 

STTR programs. 

The SBIR and STTR programs are of utmost importance to our 

Nation. I am pleased to see the Committee preserve and improve 
261 

upon these critical programs. I along with millions of our fellow 

American recognize the value of innovative research. I will continue to fight to strengthen funding for agencies that support such 

cutting-edge research, and by extension, funding for the SBIR and 

STTR programs. 

These programs have a proven record of driving innovation that 

has played a major role in American job creation, increased productivity, and United States global competitiveness. These programs 

have proven to be among the most successful drivers of technological innovation in our Nation’s history, delivering more than 

70,000 patents and revolutionary achievements in agriculture, in 

defense, in energy, health sciences, homeland security, space, 

transportation, and other fields. Thanks to phase I and phase II 

SBIR, countless jobs have been created in my own capital region 

of New York. Programs such as SBIR have helped our region give 

birth to a boon in high-technology innovation and economic development. 

Numerous reviews by the National Academies have found that 

the SBIR and STTR programs are achieving their ambitious objectives of stimulating technological innovation, increasing small business participation in the Federal R&D enterprise, and increasing 

the commercialization of federally funded research and development. In fact, the National Academies surveys of SBIR/STTR phase 

II awardees over a 10-year period found that 27 percent of sales 

from National Institutions of Health-funded technologies and 36 

percent of sales from National Science Foundation technologies 

generated more than $1 million in revenue. 

Demand for the popular and highly competitive SBIR program 

remains high. At the National Science Foundation, only 17.2 percent of phase I proposals are funded, and at the National Institutes 

of Health, only 12.6 percent of phase I proposals are funded. 

For these reasons and more, I ask that you support this sense 

of Congress to the extent it does not undermine other research and 

development programs. Agencies should consider providing additional support for the SBIR and STTR programs, especially in technology areas that are high priority for an agency’s mission as well 

as for our Nation’s economy. 

Agencies are already able to provide additional support. This 

amendment encourages them to do so in cases where it would not 

undermine other research and development programs. This is nonbinding language. It simply encourages agencies to consider providing additional support for these very successful programs. 

I recent held a roundtable in my district with SBIR and STTR 

recipients, who expressed the extraordinary value of these programs. I promised that I would do all that I can to support these 

critical programs—a promise I intend to keep. 

I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this simple sense 

of Congress amendment to show our strong commitment to the 

SBIR and STTR programs. 

With that, I thank you, Mr. Chair, and I yield back the balance 

of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Tonko, and I’ll need to recognize myself in opposition to the amendment. But let me say that 

I appreciate both the amendment and I appreciate the gentleman’s 
262 

intent and I appreciate his desire to want to increase funding for 

these two great programs. 

However, I need to oppose the amendment. Both SBIR and STTR 

receive all of their funding from Federal agencies’ research budgets. 

SBIR began with a deduction of .2 percent from agencies’ budgets. 

The SBIR allocation from basic research is now 3.2 percent, or 16 

times higher. Today, 11 Federal agencies provide funding to small 

businesses through SBIR and five agencies provide funding 

through STTR, a total of nearly $3 billion this year. That’s over six 

times greater than the $45 million spent under the original program in 1983, or an average increase of almost 200 percent per 

year. 

There are other Committees in the House and Senate that wanted to increase the set-asides in the last reauthorization. Science 

Committee Republicans and Democrats last year stood together to 

oppose the increase in set-asides and protect funding for basic and 

fundamental research. So I can’t support the amendment that increases the set-asides for SBIR and STTR, which is at the expense 

of Federal basic research budgets. In other words, I could support 

it but I don’t want to cut the basic research, and I hope you understand that’s the reason and nothing more. 

So I urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment even though, 

as I say, it’s well intended, and if there was another way to fund 

it without taking it out of basic research, I’d support the resolution, 

but I need to oppose it at this point. 

Are there other Members who wish to be recognized to discuss 

the amendment? The gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson, is 

recognized. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the 

last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I strongly support the SBIR program and would 

like to see it grow. Like Mr. Tonko, I would like to see it grow 

along with growing budgets for all of our important research and 

development programs. 

Unfortunately, under this Administration, critical science and 

technology investments at many of our agencies are under threat, 

which I believe really is the future of this Nation to make sure that 

we have strong research and development. 

The Trump Administration is even proposing to cut NIH by 20 

percent, the National Science Foundation by 11 percent. Never before have I seen such draconian cuts from any Administration, 

Democrat or Republican. 

I have confidence that Congress will reject many of these harmful proposals but I worry that even Congress will not do enough to 

ensure continued U.S. leadership in science and technology. 

This is simply a sense of Congress. Mr. Tonko lays out a strong 

case for why the SBIR program is a valuable part of our overall 

Federal R&D portfolio, and I associate myself with those comments. 

I supported the 2011 SBIR and STTR reauthorization bill that 

included a 30 percent increase for the programs. The SBIR and 

STTR programs are currently authorized through Fiscal Year 2022 

at a combine set-aside level of 3.65 percent. Given our current 
263 

budget environment, I supported and continue to support the flat 

5-year extension included in last year’s National Defense Authorization Act, and I do not believe we should revisit the terms of that 

agreement. 

Mr. Tonko’s amendment includes a non-binding sense of Congress that agencies should consider increasing their investments in 

the SBIR program without undermining other R&D programs. 

There may be some procurement agencies that would see a net 

benefit from voluntarily increasing their support by—for SBIR in 

technology areas relevant to their own mission. For other agencies, 

especially the basic research agencies, the tradeoff involves an increasing support for small business R&D and may not make—as I 

said in my opening statement, our basic research enterprise is already at risk due to flat or decreasing funding and the historically 

low proposal success rates. The 17.2 percent success rate for National Science Foundation’s SBIR phase I grants as described in 

Mr. Tonko’s amendment is troubling. Unfortunately, it is equal to 

or higher than the proposed success rates across most of the engineering directorate or at NSF. 

Other research programs at NSF are even worse off. We cannot 

afford to take any actions that would further destabilize the basic 

research foundation upon which our entire innovation is built. 

I want to thank Mr. Tonko for his carefully considered amendment, and I believe it strikes the right balance of supporting the 

SBIR programs without doing any harm to any important Federal 

reserve programs. I support this amendment and encourage my colleagues to do the same. This is simply a sense of Congress. 

Thank you, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

Any other Member wish to speak on this amendment? 

If not, the question is on—— 

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair? 

Chairman SMITH. Who seeks recognition? 

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair, if I might? 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman from New York is recognized. 

Mr. TONKO. You know, just like the global race on space in the 

1960’s, which required our total investment and focus in a bipartisan way to achieve victory, as we did in 1969 by landing an 

American as the first on the Moon, we’re in the midst of an innovation global race, and I think that this Committee is assigned the 

awesome responsibility of recognizing the tools that we need in the 

kit for our industries and our Nation to grow successfully in this 

innovation race. 

I think the statement here made by the Committee is just that, 

that it’s a sense of Congress. We would be recognized as partners 

with the agencies to say we do all that we can to provide the resources we need for SBIR and STTR. 

When I had my roundtable with the recipients from those programs in my district most recently, they raised the issue that they 

go to international conferences, and because these two programs 

are so successful, other nations are setting up like programs and 

they’re going to go beyond what we’re funding here and we’re going 

to lose intellect and we’re going to lose innovation if we don’t invest 
264 

and at least encourage it. It should be this Committee’s mission to 

say we can do better, we must do better. 

With that, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Will the gentleman yield to me before he yields 

back? 

Mr. TONKO. Yes, sir. 

Chairman SMITH. I just want to make two points, and I don’t 

know that I disagree with a single word that the gentleman said 

and said well. My objections are that the funding for these programs have been increasing, as I mentioned a while ago, at almost 

200 percent per year, and any money, additional money that goes 

to these two programs is going to come you f basic research, and 

I do not want to see that cut at all, and so I’ll be happy to yield 

to the gentleman. 

Mr. TONKO. Yes. Thank you. 

We should also see it as our responsibility to suggest that perhaps these agencies need more dollars. Caving in here because 

we’re limiting ourselves when we have an opportunity to raise that 

limitation that’s been imposed, I’m really concerned about where 

this Administration is taking us in the midst of an innovation economy. It’s about research, it’s about innovation, and if we’re taking 

those tools away, those investments away, if we’re dumbing down, 

this should be an encouragement from this Committee to say we 

need to do more at these agencies that are in the midst of an innovation economy. 

We’re transitioning into something brand new here, and now is 

not the time to just dip our toe in the water and walk away. We 

need to plunge into it and give the private sector the tools it needs 

and the partnership it requires. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Tonko. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman from California, Mr. Rohrabacher, is recognized. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Let me just note, I respect the gentleman’s 

opinion and I know that there’s a difference in approach between 

the two sides of the aisle but we can respect each other, and I do 

respect the idea that we need to spend more. That’s the concept. 

We hear it off and on just about every subject. Let me just note 

that on this side of the aisle, we generally say we don’t need to 

spend more, we need to spend better. We need to be more cognizant of the value of what we’re doing, and we need to make sure 

that we are fine-tuning this so that the money that is being spent 

is being taken out of other areas of our economy, it’s being spent 

for its best possible purpose. 

So I would support the Chairman’s opposition, but respecting the 

other side who obviously you have a desire to achieve the best 

goals for our country, and so do we. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher. 

The question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by Mr. 

Tonko. 

All in favor, say aye. 

All opposed, no. 
265 

In the opinion of the Chair—— 

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair? 

Chairman SMITH [continuing]. The nos have it and the amendment is not agreed to. 

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair, I ask for a recorded vote, please. 

Chairman SMITH. A recorded vote has been requested, and the 

clerk will call the roll. Mr. Perlmutter requested it too. 

The clerk will call the roll. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith? 

Chairman SMITH. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith votes no. 

Mr. Lucas? 

Mr. LUCAS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lucas votes no. 

Mr. Rohrabacher? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Rohrabacher votes no. 

Mr. Brooks? 

Mr. BROOKS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Brooks votes no. 

Mr. Hultgren? 

Mr. HULTGREN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Hultgren votes no. 

Mr. Posey? 

Mr. POSEY. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Posey votes no. 

Mr. Massie? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Bridenstine? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber? 

Mr. WEBER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber votes no. 

Mr. Knight? 

Mr. KNIGHT. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Knight votes no. 

Mr. Babin? 

Mr. BABIN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Babin votes no. 

Mrs. Comstock? 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. No. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Comstock votes no. 

Mr. Palmer? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Loudermilk? 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Loudermilk votes no. 

Mr. Abraham? 

Mr. ABRAHAM. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Abraham votes no. 

Mr. LaHood? 

Mr. LAHOOD. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. LaHood votes no. 

Mr. Webster? 
266 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Banks? 

Mr. BANKS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Banks votes no. 

Mr. Biggs? 

Mr. BIGGS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Biggs votes no. 

Mr. Marshall? 

Mr. MARSHALL. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Marshall votes no. 

Mr. Dunn? 

Mr. DUNN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Dunn votes no. 

Mr. Higgins? 

Mr. HIGGINS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Higgins votes no. 

Ms. Johnson? 

Ms. JOHNSON. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson votes aye. 

Ms. Lofgren? 

Ms. LOFGREN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Lofgren votes aye. 

Mr. Lipinski? 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lipinski votes aye. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Bera? 

Mr. BERA. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Bera votes aye. 

Ms. Esty? 

Ms. ESTY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Esty votes aye. 

Mr. Veasey? 

Mr. VEASEY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Veasey votes aye. 

Mr. Beyer? 

Mr. BEYER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Beyer votes aye. 

Ms. Rosen? 

Ms. ROSEN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Rosen votes aye. 

Mr. McNerney? 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. McNerney votes aye. 

Mr. Perlmutter? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Perlmutter votes aye. 

Mr. Tonko? 

Mr. TONKO. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Tonko votes aye. 

Mr. Takano? 

Mr. TAKANO. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Takano votes aye. 
267 

Mr. Foster? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Hanabusa? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Crist? 

Mr. CRIST. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Crist votes aye. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

Ms. BONAMICI. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Bonamici votes aye. 

Chairman SMITH. Are there any Members who wish to cast their 

vote or change their vote? And if not, the clerk will report the vote. 

The CLERK. Mr. Chairman, 14 Members have voted aye, 18 Members have voted nay. 
268 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY -1151

h 

Full Committee Roll Call 

DATE: 06-22-2017 

Bill: H.R. 2763 

ROLL CALL NO. 1 

Working Quorum: 13 

Amendment Sponsor: Mr. Tonka 

MEMBER 

1 Mr. Smith, Texas, Chair 

2 Mr. Lucas Oklahoma, Vice Chair 

3 Mr. Rohrabacher, California 

4 Mr. Brooks, Alabama 

5 Mr. Hultgren, Illinois 

6 Mr. Posey, Florida 

7 Mr. Massie, Kentuckv 

8 Mr. Bridenstine, Oklahoma 

9 Mr. Weber, Texas 

10 Mr. Knight, California 

11 Mr. Babin, Texas 

12 Mrs. Comstock, Virginia 

13 Mr. Palmer, Alabama 

14 Mr. Loudermilk, Georgia 

15 Mr. Abraham, Louisiana 

16 Mr. LaHood, Illinois 

17 Mr. Webster, Florida 

18 Mr. Banks, Indiana 

19 Mr. Biggs, Arizona 

20 Mr. Marshall, Kansas 

21 Mr. Dunn Florida 

22 Mr. Higgins, louisiana 

1 Ms. Johnson, Texas, Rankina Member 

2 Ms. Lofgren, California 

3 Mr. Lipinski, Illinois 

4 Ms. Ms. Bonamici, Oreaon 

5 Mr. Bera, California 

6 Ms. Esty, Connecticut 

7 Mr. Veasey, Texas 

8 Mr. Beyer, Virginia 

9 Ms. Rosen, Nevada 

10 Mr. Jerry McNerny, California 

11 Mr. Ed Perlmutter, Colorado 

12 Mr. Paul Tonko, New York 

13 Mr. Bill Foster, Illinois 

14 Mr. Mark Takano, California 

15 Ms. Colleen Hanabusa, Hawaii 

16 Mr. Charlie Crist, Florida 

17 VACANT 

TOTALS 

•• Vice Chair 

Reporting Quorum: 20 

AMENDMENT NO. 010 

DEFEATED 

AYE NO PRESENT NOT VOTING 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

15 18 
269 

Chairman SMITH. The nays have it, and the amendment is not 

agreed to. 

The gentleman from Illinois is recognized to cast a late vote as 

long as it’s no. OK. Dr. Foster will be recorded as having voted aye. 

If there are no further amendments, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space and Technology report H.R. 2763 to the House as amended with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 2763 to the House 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

Without objection, the Motion to Reconsider is laid upon the 

table. H.R. 2763 is ordered reported to the House, and I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any necessary technical and conforming changes. Without objection, so ordered. 

Thank you all for a great attendance today, a great discussion on 

an important bill, and we stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 10:59 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(271) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 2763, AMENDMENT ROSTER
272 

115THCONGRESS H R 2763 1ST SESSIOX 

• • 

To ameud the Small Business Act to impro\'e the SllU\11 Business Innovation 

Rest>.arch progrllm An<l SmRII Business Technology Transfer program, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

l\IAY 30, 2017 

Mr. 1\)aGHT (fot· himself and l\Irs. MURPHY of Florida) introduced the follo\\ing bill; which was referred to the Committee ou Small Business, and 

in addition to the Committee on Science, Space, and Teelmologv, for n 

periocl to be subsequently determinecl by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provision~ RS fRII \litlun the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend the Small Business Act to improve the Small 

Business Innovation Research program and Small Business Technology Transfer program, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tiues of the United States of America in Cong·ress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Small Business Irmo5 vatiou Research and Small Business Teclmology Transfer 

6 Improvements Act of 2017". 
273 

2 

1 SEC. 2. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. 

2 (a) 1\.~:NUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS.-8ection 

3 9(b)(7) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(b)(7)) 

4 is amended by striking "to report not less than ammally" 

5 and inserting "to submit a report not later than December 

6 31 of each year". 

7 (b) Al'iNUAL REPORT TO SBA M'D THE OFFICE OF 

8 SCIENCE &'iD TECHNOLOGY POLICY.-Section 9(g)(9) of 

9 the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(g)(9)) is amended 

10 by striking "make an arumal report" and inserting "not 

11 later than March 30 of each year, submit a report". 

12 SEC. 3. REQUIRING INSERTION INCENTIVES. 

13 Section 9(y)(5) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

14 638(y)(5)) is amended by striking "is authorized to" and 

15 inserting "shall". 

16 SEC. 4. SBIR PHASE FLEXIBILITY. 

17 Section 9(cc) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

18 638(cc)) is amended by striking "During fiscal years" and 

19 all that follows through "may each provide" and inserting 

20 "During fiscal years 2018 through 2022, all agencies par21 ticipating in the SBIR program may provide". 

22 SEC. 5. ESTABLISHING THE CIVILIAN AGENCY COMMER23 CIALIZATION READINESS PROGRAM. 

24 Section 9(gg) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

25 638(gg)) is amended-

•HR 2783 m 
274 

3 

1 ( 1) by amending the subsection heading to read 

2 as follows: "CIVILIAl" AGENCY COMMERCIALIZATION 

3 READINESS PRoGR.fu\I"; 

4 (2} in paragraph (1), by inserting "to establish 

5 a Civilian Agency Commercialization Readiness Pro6 gram for civilian agencies" after "the covered Fed7 eral agency''; 

8 (3) in paragraph (2)(A}-

9 (A) by striking "establish a pilot program" 

10 and inserting "establish a Ch1.lian Agency Com11 mercialization Readiness Program under this 

12 subsection"; and 

13 (B) by striking "the pilot program" and 

14 inserting "such Ch-ilian Agency Commercializa15 tion Readiness Program"; 

16 (4) in paragraphs (3} and (4), by striking "a 

17 pilot program" each place such term appears and in18 serting "a Civilian Commercialization Readiness 

19 Program"; 

20 (5) in paragraph (6), by striking "the pilot pro21 gram" and inserting "a Civilian Agency Commer22 cializatiou Readiness Program''; 

23 (6) by striking paragraph (7) and redesignating 

24 paragraph (8) as paragraph (7}; and 

•HR 2763 m 
275 

4 

1 (7) in paragraph (7) (as so redesignated), by 

2 amending subparagraph (B) to read as follows: 

3 "(B) the term 'Civilian Agency Commer4 cialization Readiness Program' means each proS gram established under paragraph (1).". 

6 SEC. 6. EXTENSION OF DEADLINE FOR ASSISTANCE FOR 

7 ADMINISTRATIVE, OVERSIGHT, AND CON· 

8 TRACT PROCESSING COSTS. 

9 Section 9(mm)(l) of the Small Business Act (15 

10 U.S.C. 638(mm)(l)) is amended by striking "September 

11 30, 2017" and inserting "September 30, 2022". 

0 

•HB 2783 IH 
276 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\TECH\2763_MNG.XML 

AMENDMENr TO H.R. 2763 

OFFERED BY MR. SMITH OF TExAs 

Page 2, strike lines 7 through 11 and insert the following: 

1 (b) A.t"'~JNUAL REPORT TO SBA AND THE 0F~'ICE 0]' 

2 SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY.-Section 9(g)(9) of 

3 the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(g)(9)) is amend4 ed5 (1) by striking "make an annual report" and 

6 inserting "not later than March 30 of each year, 

7 submit a report"; and 

8 (2) by striking "and the Office of Science and 

9 Technology Policy" and inserting ", the Office of 

10 Science and Technology Policy, the Committee on 

11 Science, Space, and Technology and the Committee 

12 on Small Business of the House of Representatives, 

13 and the Committee on Small Business and Entrepre14 neurship of the Senate" 

At the end of the bill, add the following: 

g:\VHLC\062017\062017.301.xml 

June 20, 2017 (4:07p.m.) 

(66392912) 
277 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\TECH\2763_MNG.XML 

2 

1 SEC. __ • IMPROVEMENTS TO TECHNICAL AND BUSINESS 

2 ASSISTANCE IN THE SBIR AND STTR PRO3 GRAMS. 

4 Section 9(q) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

5 638(q)) is amended6 (1) in the subsection heading, by inserting 

7 "AND BUSINESS" after "TECHNICAl/'; 

8 (2) in paragraph (1)-

9 (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph 

10 (A)-

11 (i) by striking "a vendor selected 

12 under paragraph (2)" and inserting "1 or 

13 more vendors selected under paragraph 

14 (2)(A)"; 

15 (ii) by inserting "and business" before 

16 "assistance services"; and 

17 (iii) by inserting "assistance with 

18 product sales, intellectual property protec19 tions, market research, market validation, 

20 and development of regulatory plans and 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

g:\VHLC\062017\062017 .301.xml 

June 20,2017 (4:07p.m.) 

manufacturing plans,'' after "technologies,"; and 

(B) in subparagraph (D), by inserting ", 

including intellectual property protections" before the period at the end; 

(3) in paragraph (2)-

(66392912) 
278 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\TECH\2763_MNG.XML 

3 

(A) by striking "Each agency may select a 

2 vendor to assist small business concerns to 

3 meet" and inserting the following: 

4 "(A) IN GENI<JRAL.-Each agency may se5 lect 1 or more vendors from which small busi6 ness concerns may obtain assistance in meet7 ing"; and 

8 (B) by adding at the end the following: 

9 "(B) SELECTION BY SMALL BUSI!\'ESS 

10 CONCERN.-A small business concern may, by 

11 contract or otherwise, select 1 or more vendors 

12 to assist the small business concern in meeting 

13 the goals listed in paragraph (1)."; and 

14 (4) in paragraph (3)-

15 (A) by inserting "(A)" after "paragraph 

16 (2)" each place it appears; 

17 (B) in subparagraph (A), by striking 

18 "$5,000 per year" each place it appears and in19 serting "$6,500 per project"; 

20 (C) in subparagraph (B)-

21 (i) by striking "$5,000 per year" each 

22 place it appears and inserting "$35,000 

23 per project"; and 

24 (ii) m clause (ii), by striking "which 

25 shall be m addition to the amount of the 

g:\VHLC\0620171062017.301 .xml . (66392912) 

June 20, 2017 (4:07 p.m.) 
279 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\TECH\2763_MNG.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:\VHLC\0620171062017.301.xml 

June 20, 2017 (4:07 p.m.) 

4 

recipient's award" and inserting "which 

may, as determined appropriate by the 

head of the agency, be included as part of 

the recipient's award or be in addition to 

the amount of the recipient's award"; 

(D) in subparagraph (C)-

(i) by inserting "or business" after 

"technical"; 

(ii) by striking "the vendor" and mserting "a vendor"; and 

(iii) by adding at the end the follmving: "Business-related services may be 

obtained from an entity, such as a public 

or private organization or an agency of or 

other entity established or funded by a 

State, that facilitates or accelerates the 

commercialization of technologies or assists 

in the creation and growth of private enterprises that are commercializing technology."; 

(E) in subparagraph (D)-

(i) by inserting "or business" after 

"technical" eaeh place it appears; and 

(ii) in clause (i)-

(66392912) 
280 

G:\CMfE\SC\15\TECH\2763_MNG.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

5 

(I) by striking "the vendor" and 

inserting "1 or more vendors"; and 

(II) by striking "provides" and 

inserting "provide"; and 

(F) by adding at the end the following: 

"(E) MULTIPLE AWARD RECIPIENTS.-The 

Administrator shall establish a limit on the 

amount of technical and business assistance 

serviCes that may be received or purchased 

under subparagraph (B) by a small business 

concern that has received multiple Phase II 

SBIR or STTR awards for a fiscal year.". 

13 SEC. . .. _. ADDITIONAL SBIR AND STIR TECHNOLOGY IN14 SERTION REPORTING REQUIREMENT. 

15 Section 9(y)(6) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

16 638(y)(6)) is amended17 (1) in subparagraph (B), by striking "and" at 

18 the end; 

19 (2) in subparagraph (C)(iii), by striking the pe20 riod at the end and inserting "; and"; and 

21 (3) by adding at the end the following new sub22 paragraph: 

23 "(D) not later than 120 days after the 

24 date of the enactment of this subparagraph, 

25 and not later than December 31 of each year 

g:\VHLC\062017\062017.301.xml 

June 20,2017 (4:07p.m.) 

(66392912) 
281 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\TECH\2763_MNG.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

g:\VHLC\062017\062017.301.xml 

June 20, 2017 (4:07p.m.) 

6 

thereafter, submit to the Committee on Science, 

Space, and Technology and the Committee on 

Small Business of the House of Representatives, and to the Committee on Small Business 

and Entrepreneurship of the Senate, a report 

describing the goals set under subparagraph 

(A) and the incentives used or created under 

subparagraph (B).". 

(66392912) 
282 

G:ICMTEISC\15\TECH\2763_00l.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 2763 

OFFERED BY MR. LOUDERMILK OF GEORGIA 

At the end of the bill, add the following: 

1 SEC. • CONTINGENT LIMITATION ON USE OF CERTAIN 

2 FUNDS PENDING SUBMISSION OF REPORT. 

3 (a) REPORT DEADLINE.-The Administrator of the 

4 Small Business Administration shall submit the annual rc5 port required under section 9(b)(7) of the Small Business 

6 Act (15 U.S.C. 638(b)(7)) not later than the last day of 

7 each calendar year. 

8 (b) PROHIBITION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

9 PAILURE TO SUBMIT REPOR'l'.-If the Administrator does 

10 not meet the deadline for submission under subsection (a) 

11 with respect to a calendar year, no funds authorized to 

12 be appropriated or otherwise made available to the Small 

13 Business Administration by this Act, or any other Act, 

14 may be obligated or expended for travel by the Adminis15 trator for the following calendar year until such time as 

16 the Administrator submits the report described under sub17 section (a). 

g:\VHLC\062117\062117.303.xml 

June 21,2017 (4:25p.m.} 

(66395814} 
283 

G:\M\15\HULTGR\HULTGR_O 19.XML 

.AMENDMENT TO H.R. 2763 

OFFERED BY MR. HULTGREN OF ILLINOIS 

At the end of the bill, add the following: 

1 SEC. 7. ENCOURAGING INNOVATION IN UNITED STATES 

2 MANUFACTURING. 

3 Section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638) 

4 is amended by adding at the end the following: 

5 "(tt) ENCOURAGING INNOVATION IN UNITED STATES 

6 1\'lA.._'\lUFACTURING.-In carrying out this section, the Ad7 ministrator shall8 " ( 1) ensure that, in selecting small business 

9 concerns to participate in SBIR or STTH, programs 

10 under this section, Federal agencies give high pri11 ority to small manufacturing companies and other 

12 small business concerns that arc engaged in manu13 facturing research and development for the purpose 

14 of developing and producing new products and tech15 nologies in the United States; and 

16 "(2) include in the annual report to Congress 

17 under subsection (b) ( 7) a determination of whether 

18 the priority described in paragraph ( 1) is being car19 ried out.". 

g:\VHLC\062117\062117.014.xml 

June 21, 2017 (9:24a.m.) 

(66384115) 
284 

G:\M\15\HIGGLA\HIGGLA_016.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 2763 

OFFERED BY MR. HIGGINS OF LOUISIANA 

At the end of the bill, add the follmving: 

1 SEC. 7. ENCOURAGING INNOVATION IN CYBERSECURITY. 

2 Section 9 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638) 

3 is amended by adding at the end the following: 

4 "(tt) E~COURAGING !~NOVATION IN 

5 CYBERSECURITY.-In carrying out this section, the Ad6 ministrator shall7 "(1) ensure that, in selecting small business 

8 concerns to participate in SBIR or STTR programs 

9 under this section, Federal agencies give high pri10 ority to small business concerns that are engaged in 

11 cybersecurity research and development, for the pur12 pose of developing and implementing technology 

13 services and products to strengthen the security of 

14 United States Government and private computer 

15 systems, including software, hardware, and portable 

16 devices; and 

17 "(2) include m the annual report to Congress 

18 under subsection (b)(7) a determination of whether 

g:\VHLC\0620171062017.201.xml 

June 20, 2017 (12:55 p.m.) 

(66385713) 
285 

G:\M\15\HIGGLA\HIGGLA_016.XML 

2 

1 the priority deseribed in paragraph (1) is being ear2 ried out.". 

g:\VHLC\062017\062017 .201.xml 

June 20,2017 (12:55 p.m.) 

(66385713) 
286 

G:\M\15\LIPINSILIPINS_025.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 2763 

OFFERED BY MR. LIPINSKI OF ILLINOIS 

At the end of the bill, add the following: 

1 SEC. ___ • INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO TECHNOLOGY 

2 TRANSFER. 

3 Section 9(jj) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 

4 638(jj)) is amended to read as follows: 

5 "(jj) INNOVATIVE APPROACHES TO TECHNOLOGY 

6 TRANSFER.-

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

g:\VHLC\051 717\061 71 7.003.xml 

June 17, 2017 (3:23 p.m.) 

"(1) GRANT PROGRAM.-

"(A) IN GENERAIJ.-Each Federal agency 

required by subsection (n) to establish an 

ST'l'R program shall carry out an Innovative 

Approaches to rreclmology Transfer Grant ProgTam (hereinafter referred to as a 'Program') 

to support innovative approaches to technology 

transfer at institutions of higher education (as 

defined in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)), nonprofit research institutions, and Federal laboratories in order to accelerate the commercialization of federally funded research and technology 

(66349213) 
287 

G:\M\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_025.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\061717\061717.003.xml 

June 17, 2017 (3:23 p.m.) 

2 

by small business concerns, including new businesses. 

"(B) AWARDING OF GRANTS TO QUALIFYING INSTITUTIONS.-

"(i) IN GENERAL.-Each Federal 

agency described in subparagraph (A) shall 

provide grants, through a competitive, 

merit-based process, in the amounts listed 

in subparagraph (C)(i) to institutions of 

higher education, technology transfer organizations that facilitate the commercialization of technologies developed by one or 

more such institutions of higher education, 

Federal laboratories, other public and private nonprofit entities, and consortia thereof, for initiatives that help identify highquality, commercially viable federally funded research and technologies and to facilitate and accelerate their transfer into the 

marketplace. 

"(ii) SELECTION PROCESS A1'{D APPLICATIONS.-Qualifying institutions seeking 

a grant under this subsection shall submit 

an application to a Federal agency described in subparagraph (A) at such time, 

(66349213) 
288 

G:IM\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_025.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

3 

in such manner, and containing such information as the agency may require. The application shall include, at a minimum-

"(!) a description of innovative 

approaches to technology transfer, 

technology development, and commercial readiness that have the potential 

to increase or accelerate technology 

transfer outcomes and can be adopted 

by other qualifying institutions, or a 

demonstration of proven technology 

transfer and commercialization strategies, or a plan to implement proven 

technology transfer and commercialization strategies, that can achieve 

greater commercialization of federally 

funded research and technologies with 

Program funding; 

"(II) a description of how the 

qualifying institution will contribute 

to local and regional economic development efforts; and 

"(III) a plan for sustainability 

beyond the duration of the funding 

award. 

g:\VHLC\061717\061717.003.xml 

June 17,2017 (3:23p.m.) 

(66349213) 
289 

G:\M\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_025.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

4 

"(iii) USE OF FUNDS.-Activities supported by grants under this subsection 

may include--

"(I) providing early-stage proof 

of concept funding for translational 

research; 

"(II) identifying research and 

technologies at recipient institutions 

that have the potential for accelerated 

commercialization; 

"(III) technology maturation 

funding to support activities such as 

prototype construction, experiment 

analysis, product comparison, and collecting performance data; 

"(IV) technical validations, market research, clarifying intellectual 

property rights position and strategy, 

and investigating commercial and 

business opportunities; and 

"(V) programs to provide advice, 

mentoring, entrepreneurial education, 

project management, and technology 

and business development expertise to 

innovators and recipients of techg:\VHLC\061717\061717.003.xml 

June 17, 2017 (3:23 p.m.) 

(66349213) 
290 

G:\M\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_025.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHlC\061717\061717.003.xml 

June 17,2017 (3:23p.m.) 

(66349213) 

5 

nology transfer licenses to ma.xtmrze 

commercialization potential. 

"(iv) PROGRA.I\1 OVERSIGHT BOARD.-

"(!) IN GEKERAL.-Successful 

applications required under clause (ii) 

shall include a plan to assemble a 

Program Oversight Board, the members of which shall have technical, scientific, or business expertise and shall 

be drawn from industry, start-up companies, venture capital, technical enterprises, financial institutions, and 

business development organizations. 

"(II) PROJECT AWARDS.-A Program Oversight Board shall-

" ( aa) establish award programs for individual projects; 

"(bb) provide rigorous evaluation of prqject applications; 

"(cc) determine which 

projects should receive awards, in 

accordance with guidelines established by the Board; 

"(dd) establish milestones 

and associated award amounts 
291 

G:IM\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_025.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

6 

for projects that reach milestones; 

"(ee) determine whether 

awarded projects are reaching 

milestones; and 

"(ff) develop a process to reallocate outstanding award 

amounts from projects that are 

not reaching milestones to other 

projects ·with more potential. 

"(C) GRANT Mm AWARD AMOUNTS.-

"(i) GRAl'{T AMOUNTS.-Each Federal 

agency described in subparagraph (A) may 

make grants under subparagraph (B) to 

qualifying institutions for up to 

$1,000,000 per year for up to 3 years. 

"(ii) AWARD .AMOUNTS.-Each qualifying institution that receives a grant 

under subparagraph (B) shall provide 

awards for individual projects of not more 

than $150,000, to be provided in phased 

amounts, based on reaching the milestones 

established by the qualifying institution's 

Program Oversight Board. 

g:\VHLC\061717\061717.003.xml 

June 17, 2017 (3:23 p.m.) 

(66349213) 
292 

G:\M\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_025.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

7 

"(D) Al~THORIZJ<JD J<JXPJ<JNDITl!RJ<JS !<'OR 

THJ<J PROGRAM.-

"(i) PJ<JRCJ<JNTAGK-The percentage 

of the extramural budget that each Federal 

agency described under subparagraph (A) 

exl)ends on a Program shall be---

"(I) 0.05 percent for each of fiscal years 2018 and 2019; and 

"(II) 0.1 percent for each of fiscal years 2020 and 2021. 

"(ii) TRJ<JATMJ<JNT OF J<JXPJ<JNDI12 TURJ<JS.-Any portion of the extramural 

13 budget expended by a Federal agency on a 

14 Program shall apply towards the agency's 

15 expenditure requirements under subsection 

16 (n). 

17 "(2) PROGRAM J<JVALUATION AND DATA COL18 LECTION AND DISSEMINATION.-

19 "(A) EVALUATION PLAN AND DATA COL20 LJ<JCTION.-Each Federal agency required by 

21 paragraph (1)(A) to establish a Program shall 

22 develop a program evaluation plan and collect, 

23 annually, such information from grantees as is 

24 necessary to assess the PrOb'Tam. Program eval25 nation plans shall require the collection of data 

g:\VHLC\061717\061717.003.xml 

June 17, 2017 {3:23p.m.) 

{66349213) 
293 

G:\M\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_025.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\061717\061717 .003.xml 

June 17,2017 (3:23p.m.) 

8 

aimed at identifying outcomes resulting from 

the transfer of technology with assistance from 

the Program, such as-

"(i) specific follow-on funding identified or obtained, including follow-on funding sources, such as Federal sources or 

private sources; 

"(ii) the number of projects which result in a license to a start-up company or 

an established company with sufficient resources for effective commercialization 

vv'ithin 5 years of receiving an award under 

paragraph (l)(C)(ii); 

"(iii) invention disclosures and patents; 

"(iv) the number of projects supported by qualicy'ing institutions receiving 

a grant under paragraph (l}(C)(i) that secure Phase I or Phase II SBIR or STTR 

awards; 

"(v) available information on revenue, 

sales, or other measures of products that 

have been commercialized as a result of 

projects awarded under paragraph 

(1 )(C)(ii); 

(66349213) 
294 

G:\M\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_025.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:\VHLC\061717\061717.003.xml 

June 17,2017 (3:23p.m.) 

9 

"(vi) the number and location of jobs 

created resulting from projects awarded 

under paragraph (l)(C)(ii); and 

"(vii) other data as considered appropriate by a Federal agency required by this 

subparagraph to develop a program evaluation plan. 

"(B) EVALUATIVE REPORT TO CONGRESS.-The head of each F'ederal agency that 

has a Program shall submit to the Committee 

on Science, Space, and Technology and the 

Committee on Small Business of the House of 

Representatives and the Committee on Small 

Business and Entrepreneurship of the Senate 

an evaluative report regarding the activities of 

the Program. The report shall include-

"(i) a detailed description of the Implementation of the Program; 

"(ii) a detailed description of the 

grantee selection process; 

"(iii) an accounting of the funds used 

in the Program; and 

"(iv) a summary of the data collected 

under subparagraph (A). 

(66349213) 
295 

G:\M\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_025.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

g:\VHLC\061717\061717.003.xml 

June 17,2017 (3:23p.m.) 

10 

"(C) DATA DISSEMINATION.-For purposes of Program transparency and dissemination of best practices, the Administrator shall 

include, on the public database under subsection (k)(l), information on the Program, including-

"(i) the program evaluation plan required under subparagTaph (A); 

"(ii) a list of recipients of awards 

under paragraph (l)(C)(ii); and 

"(iii) information on the use of grants 

under paragraph (l)(C)(i) by recipient institutions.". 

{66349213) 
296 

G:\M\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_035.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 2763 

OFFERED BY MR. LIPINSKI OF ILLINOIS 

At the end of the bill, add the follmving: 

1 SEC. 7. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION INNOVATION 

2 CORPS PROGRAM. 

3 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds the following: 

4 (1) The National Science Foundation Innova5 tion Corps program (in this section referred to as 

6 the "I-Corps program"), created administratively by 

7 National Science Foundation in 2011 and statutorily 

8 authorized in the American Innovation and Competi9 tiveness Act, has succeeded in increasing the com1 0 mercialization of government funded research. 

11 (2) I-Corps provides Yaluable entrepreneurial 

12 education to graduate students and postdoctoral fel13 lows, providing formal training for scientists and en14 gineers to pursue careers in business, an increas15 ingly common path for advanced degree holders. 

16 (3) The current I-Corps Teams Program is suc17 cessful in part due to its focus on providing the spe18 cific types of support and mentoring entrepreneurs 

19 need based on the early stage of their compames, 

g:\VHLC\062017\062017.365.xml 

June 20, 2017 (5:39 p.m.) 

{66402213) 
297 

G:\M\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_035.XML 

2 

1 however this support IS not available to entre2 preneurs at later stages. 

3 (4) The !-Corps Program's success in the early 

4 stages of the innovation continuum should be ex5 panded to offer training to small businesses through6 out all government funded stages of research and 

7 development. 

8 (5) Existing business accelerators and univer9 sity technology transfer programs provide an excel1 0 lent template for how to train and support early11 and mid-stage companies in achieving growth, scale, 

12 and market entry. 

13 (b) I-CORPS PROGRA..'\1 TRAINING FOR SBIR AND 

14 STTR PARTICIPA.."<TS.-

15 (1) IN GENERAL.-The Director of the National 

16 Science Foundation (in this section referred to as 

17 the "Director"), in consultation with other Federal 

18 agencies required to carry out SBIR or STTR pro19 grams under section 9 of the Small Business Act, I20 Corps regional nodes, universities, and public and 

21 private entities engaged in technology transfer or 

22 commercialization of technologi.es, shall develop re23 sources, to include model curriculum, training mate24 rials, and best practices, to support two entrepre25 neurial training programs: one program to provide 

g:IVHLC\0620171062017.365.xml 

June 20,2017 (5:39p.m.) 

(66402213) 
298 

G:\M\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_035.XML 

3 

training for small business concerns participating in 

2 phase I of an SBIR or STTR program (in this sec3 tion referred to as "!-Corps Phase I") and one pro4 gram to provide training for small business concerns 

5 participating in phase II of an SBIR or STTR pro6 gram (in this section referred to as "!-Corps Phase 

7 II"). 

8 (2) PUBLICLY AVAIIH\BLE RESOURCES.-The 

9 resources described in paragraph (1) shall be made 

10 available to the public at no cost on the public Inter11 net website of the National Science Foundation. 

12 (c) I-CORPS TRAINING SITES.-

13 (1) EijiGIBIIjiTY CRITERIA.-The Director shall 

14 develop and maintain eligibility criteria for programs 

15 to become accredited training sites to provide train16 ing to small business concerns under the !-Corps 

17 Phase I and Phase II programs using the resources, 

18 curriculum, materials, and best practices developed 

19 under subsection (b)(1). Programs eligible to apply 

20 for such accreditation shall include those operated 

21 by universities, State and local governments, non22 profit organizations, and public-private partnerships. 

23 (2) REQUIREMENT POR FEDJ<JRAL AGENCIES TO 

24 PROVIDE TRAINING.-Each Federal agency with an 

25 extramural budget for research or research and deg:\VHLC\062017\062017.365.xml 

June 20, 2017 (5:39 p.m.) 

(66402213) 
299 

G:\M\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_035.XML 

4 

velopment in excess of $100,000,000 shall make 

2 available to small business concerns participating in 

3 the agency's SBIR and, if applicable, STTI{ pro4 gram, training from accredited !-Corps Phase I and 

5 Phase II training sites. 

6 (d) DISCRETIONARY TECHNICAL ASSIST&'\JCE.-The 

7 Administrator of the Small Business Administration shall 

8 ensure that the I -Corps program is designated as a vendor 

9 eligible to provide small business concerns engaged in 

10 SBIR or STTI{ projects with technical assistance services 

11 under section 9(q) of the Small Business Act. 

12 (e) REGIONAL CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE.-Each I13 Corps regional node shall become an accredited !-Corps 

14 Phase I and Phase II training site and serve as a regional 

15 center of excellence, continuously improving and maintain16 ing the curriculum over time, and providing support to 

17 other organizations seeking to become accredited !-Corps 

18 training sites as provided in subsection (e)(1). 

19 (f) GAO EvAI,UATION.-The Comptroller General of 

20 the United States shall commence an evaluation of the I21 Corps program at all phases, including Phase 0. Such 

22 evaluation shall include23 (1) an assessment of any effect of the !-Corps 

24 program on the commercialization of federally fund25 ed research and development; 

g:IVHLC\062017\062017.365.xml 

June 20, 2017 (5:39 p.m.) 

(66402213) 
300 

G:\M\15\LIPINS\LIPINS_035JCML 

5 

1 (2) any such effect on the higher education sys2 tern; and 

3 (3) any such effect on regional economies and 

4 the national economy. 

g:\VHLC\062017\062017.365.xml 

June 20, 2017 (5:39p.m.) 

(66402213) 
301 

G:\M\15\MCNERN\MCNERN_049.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 2763 

OFFERED BY MR. MCNERNEY OF CALIFORNIA 

At the end of the bill, add the following: 

1 SEC. 7. OUTREACH TO MINORITY-SERVING INSTITUTIONS. 

2 Section 9(j)(2)(F) of the Small Business Act (15 

3 U.S.C. 638(j)(2)(F)) is amended by inserting "and the 

4 participation of minority institutions (as such term is de5 fined in section 365(3) of the Higher Education Act) and 

6 faculty conducting research at such institutions," after 

7 "Phase III of such programs,". 

g:IVHLC\062117\062117.062.xml 

June 21, 2017 (1 0:22 a.m.) 

(66409211) 
302 

G:\M\15\TONKO\TONKO_OlO.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 2763 

OFFERED BY MR. TONKO OF NEW YoRK 

At the end of the bill, add the following: 

SEC. __ . SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE VALUE OF THE 

2 SBIR AND STTR PROGRAMS. 

3 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds the following: 

4 (1) Numerous reviews by the National Acad5 emics have found that the SBIR and STTR pro6 grams are achieving their objectives of stimulating 

7 technological innovation, increasing small business 

8 participation in the Federal R&D enterprise, and in9 creasing the commercialization of federally funded 

10 research and development. 

11 (2) National Academies surveys of SBIR and 

12 STTR Phase II awardees over a 10-year period 

13 found that 27 percent of sales from technologies 

14 funded by the National Institutes of Health and 36 

15 percent of sales from National Science I<,oundation 

16 technologies generated more than $1 million in rev17 enue. 

18 (3) A third-party assessment of the U.S. Air 

19 l<1orce SBIR and STTR Program from 2000 through 

20 2013 found that Phase II contracts generated outg:\VHLC\062017\062017.3B5.xml 

June 20, 2017 (11:43 p.m.) 

(66405712) 
303 

G:\M\15\TONKO\TONKO_OIO.XML 

2 

1 side follow-on investment of $1.9 billion, and sales of 

2 new products and services totaling $14.7 billion. 

3 Further, the study found that these contracts cre4 ated an average of more than 16,000 new full-time 

5 jobs per year and resulted in $47.9 billion economic 

6 output nationwide. 

7 (4) Seventy-five percent of respondents to a 

8 2015 National Academies survey of National Insti9 tutes of Health SBIR and STTR awardees reported 

10 that the projects of such respondents would likely 

11 not, or definitely not, have proceeded without SBIR 

12 or STTR funding. 

13 (5) The demand for the SBIR program remains 

14 high. At the National Science Foundation only 17.2 

15 percent of Phase I proposals are funded and at the 

16 National Institutes of Health only 12.6 percent of 

17 Phase I proposals are funded. 

18 (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-It is the Sense of Con19 gress that, to the extent it does not undermine other re20 search and development programs, Federal agencies 

21 should consider providing additional support for the SBIR 

22 and STTR programs, especially in technology areas that 

23 are a high priority for the Federal agency's mission and 

24 for our nation's economy. 

g:\VHLC\062017\062017 .385.xml 

June 20. 2017 (11:43 p.m.) 

(66405712) 

(305) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUP ON H.R. 1159, 

UNITED STATES AND ISRAEL 

SPACE COOPERATION ACT 

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:04 a.m., in room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

H.R. 1159 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. 

Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of 

the Committee at any time. 

Pursuant to Committee Rule II(e) and House Rule 112(2)(h)(4), 

the Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes. 

Today we meet to consider H.R. 1159, the United States and 

Israel Space Cooperation Act and pursuant to notice, I now call up 

H.R. 1159, the United States and Israel Space Cooperation Act, and 

the clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 1159, a bill to provide for continuing cooperation between the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

and the Israel Space Agency, and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

I’ll recognize myself for an opening statement, and then the 

Ranking Member designee for his opening statement. 

Israel and the United States have a long history of shared cooperation, including space exploration and research. Scientists have 

collaborated on space research to advance both nations’ understanding of the universe. NASA and the Israeli Space Agency have 

also formalized their cooperation in various agreements over the 

last 30 years. 

Our two countries were bonded in 2003 when the first Israeli astronaut, Ilan Ramon, perished along with the other members of the 

Space Shuttle Columbia crew. Since then, Israel and the United 

States have cooperated on various experiments and space activities 

to the benefit of both nations. 

On October 13th, 2015, NASA and the Israeli Space Agency entered into a 10-year agreement to continue cooperation on areas of 
306 

mutual interest in space. This agreement laid out the terms and 

conditions that will facilitate future cooperation, including export 

controls, technology transfer guidelines, intellectual property protections, and facility and system access controls. These terms and 

conditions will ensure that our partnership is productive and fruitful. 

This legislation was introduced by Derek Kilmer, a former Member of this Committee, and Jim Bridenstine, a current Member. It 

reinforces cooperation between the United States and Israel, and 

advances our common goal of space exploration. I support the legislation and recommend it to my colleagues. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

Israel and the United States have a long history of shared cooperation, including 

space exploration and research. 

Scientists have collaborated on space research to advance both nations’ understanding of the universe. 

NASA and the Israeli Space Agency have also formalized their cooperation in various agreements over the last 30 years. 

Our two countries were bonded in 2003, when the first Israeli astronaut, IIan 

Ramon, perished along with the other members of the Space Shuttle Columbia crew. 

Since then, Israel and the United States have cooperated on various experiments 

and space activities to the benefit of both nations. 

On October 13th, 2015, NASA and the Israeli Space Agency entered into a 10 year 

agreement to continue cooperation on areas of mutual interest in space. 

This agreement laid out the terms and conditions that will facilitate future cooperation, including export controls, technology transfer guidelines, intellectual 

property protections, and facility and system access controls. These terms and conditions will ensure that our partnership is productive and fruitful. 

This legislation was introduced by Derek Kilmer, a former member of this Committee, and Jim Bridenstine, a current member. It reinforces cooperation between 

the United States and Israel, and advances our common goal of space exploration. 

I support the legislation and recommend it to my colleagues. 

Chairman SMITH. And now the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. 

Beyer, is recognized for his opening statement. 

Mr. BEYER. Good morning, and I want to thank our Chairman 

for holding this markup. 

Today we’re marking up H.R. 1159, the United States and Israel 

Space Cooperation Act. It is sponsored by Congressman Derek Kilmer and Congressman Jim Bridenstine. 

One of the original objectives when Congress created NASA in 

1958 was peaceful international cooperation. NASA’s international 

collaborations have yielded many technical achievements. However, 

perhaps just as noteworthy are the diplomatic advances that have 

been achieved as the result of the goodwill that has been garnered 

from NASA’s work with other nations. 

One of the highlights of NASA’s work in this area was the Apollo-Soyuz flight in 1975, which provided a peaceful avenue of cooperation with the Soviet Union at the height of the cold war, and 

later NASA collaborated with 15 other countries to construct and 

utilize the International Space Station. 

Even today, in the midst of the many difficulties we’re having 

with Russia, our ongoing collaborative work on the International 

Space Station remains a bright point in the relations between our 

country and Russia. 

The country of Israel has also been an active collaborator with 

NASA, and these collaborations have been related to research, education, and spaceflight. Israel has also shared our Nation’s pain on 
307 

one of the darkest days of our space program. As Chairman Smith 

noted, an Israeli astronaut, Ilan Ramon, was one of the astronauts 

who tragically perished in the Space Shuttle Columbia accident. 

The bill before us today will help ensure that our close collaboration with Israel in space will continue into the future, and I strongly support its passage. 

I want to thank Mr. Kilmer and Mr. Bridenstine for introducing 

this bill, and I want to thank Chairman Smith for holding today’s 

markup. 

With that, sir, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Beyer. 

The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Babin, is recognized for a statement. 

Mr. BABIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Good morning. Today we mark up H.R. 1159, the United States 

and Israel Space Cooperation Act. 

Israel and the United States have a very long history of shared 

cooperation including space exploration and research. Scientists 

have collaborated on space research to advance both nations’ understanding of the universe. 

NASA and the Israeli Space Agency have also formalized their 

cooperation in various agreements over the last 30 years. The bond 

between our two countries was forged deeper with the tragic loss 

in 2003 of the Space Shuttle Columbia crew, which included the 

first Israeli astronaut, Ilan Ramon. 

Since then, Israel and the United States have cooperated on various experiments and space activities to the benefit of both of our 

nations. Space exploration offers humanity the opportunity to work 

toward common goals and our shared interests. It presents challenges of discovery that unite us all under a common banner regardless of our nationality. 

This legislation would reinforce the bond between the United 

States and Israel and advance our common goals of discovery, inspiration and exploration, and I fully support this legislation and 

recommend its swift passage. 

Thank you, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. BABIN

Good morning, I am glad you could join us for today’s mark-up of H.R. 1159, the 

United States and Israel Space Cooperation Act. 

Cooperation on the peaceful uses of outer space is special. Certainly, it is important to find common ground with our friends and allies in our profound appreciation 

for the wonderful and awe-inspiring mysteries of the cosmos. 

However, in a time of turmoil and scarce resources, it is also vital that any common effort produce concrete accomplishments and returns for our citizens as well 

as those of our close allies. 

This legislation succeeds on both accounts. It brings Israel and the United States 

closer together in the peaceful use and exploration of outer space. In doing so, this 

cooperation will benefit the researchers, scientists, and citizens of both our nations. 

The US has had a close relationship with the Israeli space program since its infancy, more than three decades ago. Our space cooperation with Israel blossomed 

and grew until NASA launched the first Israeli astronaut into space, Ilan Ramon. 

Tragically, Ilan’s first flight in 2003 was the final voyage of the Space Shuttle Columbia. That terrible accident was, in some ways, a symbol of the relationship between our two great nations. We are bound together in times of both triumph and 

sorrow. Our journey to the stars together has been, and will continue to be, a symbol of our voyage together as nations. 
308 

In 2015, more than 10 years after the Columbia accident, NASA and the Israeli 

Space Agency renewed their commitment to partnership, signing a 10-year agreement on peaceful cooperation in space. 

That agreement elaborated a host of conditions to protect sensitive information 

that both nations possess. It also reaffirmed that all existing laws and regulations 

would remain in force. 

This agreement, which will be further strengthened by the legislation under consideration today, will benefit both our nations. 

Peaceful exploration and use of space offers all humanity a common, noble goal; 

extending our collective reach further into the heavens. Extending that reach and 

broadening our understanding of the universe is one of the most important and honorable challenges we can face together. 

I believe that increasing cooperation between NASA and our allies is vital. It is 

my belief - and hope - that bringing our two space agencies closer together will 

make us more than the sum of our parts. 

I support the legislation and recommend its swift passage. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Babin. 

And the gentlewoman from Nevada, Ms. Rosen, is recognized for 

a statement as well. 

Ms. ROSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the last 

word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. ROSEN. Mr. Chairman, I want to lend my voice of support 

to this important legislation of which I’m proud to be a cosponsor. 

H.R. 1159 will reaffirm our commitment to the U.S.-Israel relationship to robust cooperation between our two countries in space exploration and other scientific endeavors. 

This legislation is personally important to me both as a former 

systems analyst and computer scientist who believes deeply in supporting science and discovery, and also as a former president of the 

largest Reform synagogue in Nevada with a thriving Jewish community that cares deeply about Israel. 

In the face of increasing threats in the Middle East and rising 

global anti-Semitism, the bonds between the United States and 

Israel are more important now than they ever have been. Israel is 

a beacon of democracy in the region, a strategic ally and economic 

partner, and a friend, and for these reasons, we must continue to 

strengthen our relationship in a variety of areas critical to our security and economy from missile defense, to joint training, research 

and development, intelligence sharing, and of course, our activities 

in space. 

In addition to being an important diplomatic step, H.R. 1159 is 

also a reaffirmation of this body’s support for scientific discovery. 

It is those moments of national awe and wonder like the Moon 

landing from my childhood that inspired children everywhere to 

pursue careers in science, technology, engineering, and math. 

Today, by reporting this legislation out of Committee, we are saying with one voice that we remain committed to inspiring the next 

generation both here and in Israel and look upwards to pursue 

their dreams. 

Mr. Chairman, I strongly support this bill, and thank Congressmen Kilmer, Bridenstine, and Veasey for introducing it, and to all 

my colleagues on the Committee, I urge its immediate adoption. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Rosen. 

Are there any other statements? 

If not, are there any amendments? 
309 

And if not, a reporting quorum being present, I move that the 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 1159 to 

the House with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 11159 to the House 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

All those opposed, say nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

Without objection, the Motion to Reconsider is laid upon the 

table. H.R. 1159 is ordered reported to the House, and I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any necessary technical and conforming changes, and without objection, so ordered. 

Before we adjourn, I just want to thank all the Members who are 

present for being here. Your reward is a very quick markup, but 

I do appreciate everybody’s attendance. 

The other is that we are going to start the hearing of the two 

Subcommittees, joint hearing of the two Subcommittees immediately, because we expect votes at 10:15 and we’d like to get in 

as much testimony and as many questions as we can. So anyone 

who is on those two Subcommittees, if you’ll just remain maybe in 

your seats, we’ll get going on that hearing. Anyone else is welcome 

to stay, of course, if they have an interest in the subject. The hearing is primarily on the past eclipse. 

So with that, thank you all for being here, and we stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 9:12 a.m., the Committee proceeded to other 

business.] 

(311) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 1159 
312 

IJS AUrHENTICATe~ COVERNMENT 

lNFORMATlON 

GPO 

115TH CONGRESS H R 1159 1ST SESSION 

• • 

To provide for continuing cooperation between the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration and the Israel Space Agency, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 16, 2017 

1\fr. KILMER (for himself, Mr. BRIDENSTINE, Mr. DL\Z-BALART, and Mr. 

VEASEY) introduced the follo\\ing bill; which was referred to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

A BILL 

To provide for continuing cooperation between the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Israel 

Space Agency, and for other purposes. 

1 Be ·it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "United States and 

5 Israel Space Cooperation Act". 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 The Congress finds that8 (1) authorized in 1958, the National Aero9 nautics and Space Administration (NASA) supports 
313 

2 

1 and coordinates United States Government research 

2 in aeronautics, human exploration and operations, 

3 science, and space technology; 

4 (2) established in 1983, the Israel Space Agen5 cy (ISA) supports the growth of Israel's space indus6 try by supporting academic research, technological 

7 innovation, and educational activities; 

8 (3) the mutual interest of the United States 

9 and Israel in space exploration affords both nations 

10 an opportunity to leverage their unique abilities to 

11 advance scientific discovery; 

12 ( 4) in 1996, NASA and the ISA entered into 

13 their first agreement outlining areas of mutual co14 operation, which remained in force until 2005; 

15 (5) since 1996, NASA and the ISA have suc16 cessfully cooperated on many space programs sup17 porting the Global Positioning System and research 

18 related to the sun, earth science, and the environ19 ment; 

20 (6) the bond between NASA and the ISA was 

21 permanently forged on February 1, 2003, with the 

22 loss of the crew of STS-107 including Israeli Astro23 naut llan Ramon; 

24 (7) the United States-Israel Strategic Partner25 ship Act of 2014 (Publie Law 113-296) designated 

•HR 1169 Dl 
314 

3 

1 Israel as a Major Strategic Partner of the United 

2 States; and 

3 (8) on October 13, 2015, the United States and 

4 Israel signed the Framework Agreement between the 

5 National Aeronautics and Space Administration of 

6 the United States of America and the Israel Space 

7 Agency for Cooperation in Aeronautics and the Ex8 ploration and Use of Airspace and Outer Space for 

9 Peaceful Purposes. 

10 SEC. 3. CONTINUING COOPERATION. 

11 The Administrator of the National Aeronautics and 

12 Space Administration shall continue to work with the 

13 Israel Space Agency to identify and cooperatively pursue 

14 peaceful space exploration and science initiatives in areas 

15 of mutual interest. 

0 

•HR 1159 m 
(315) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUPS: H.R. 4376, THE DEPARTMENT 

OF ENERGY RESEARCH 

INFRASTRUCTURE ACT OF 2017; 

H.R. 4377, ACCELERATING AMERICAN 

LEADERSHIP IN SCIENCE ACT OF 2017; 

H.R. 4378, NUCLEAR ENERGY RESEARCH 

INFRASTRUCTURE ACT OF 2017; 

H.R. 4375, STEM RESEARCH AND 

EDUCATION EFFECTIVENESS AND 

TRANSPARENCY ACT; 

H.R. 4323, SUPPORTING VETERANS 

IN STEM CAREERS ACT; 

H.R. 4254, WOMEN IN AEROSPACE 

EDUCATION ACT; AND 

H.R. 3397, BUILDING BLOCKS 

OF STEM ACT 

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m., in room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of the Committee at any time. 

Pursuant to Committee rule 2(e) and House rule XI(2)(h)(4), the 

Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes. 

Today, we meet to consider H.R. 4376, the Department of Energy 

Research Infrastructure Act of 2017; H.R. 4377, the Accelerating 

American Leadership in Science Act of 2017; H.R. 4378, the Nuclear Energy Research Infrastructure Act of 2017; H.R. 4375, the 

STEM Research and Education Effectiveness and Transparency 

Act; H.R. 4323, the Supporting Veterans in STEM Careers Act; H.R. 

4254, the Women in Aerospace Education Act; and H.R. 3397, the 

Building Blocks of STEM Act. 
316 

Now, all these seven bills are bipartisan bills, and we are only 

expecting one amendment on each of two bills, I believe. 

I’ll recognize myself for an opening statement. 

Today, we will consider the seven bills, starting with three energy bills. Together, these first three bills direct and authorize upgrades to Department of Energy facilities across the country. DOE 

national labs host over 30,000 researchers each year. These bills 

provide infrastructure investments that are crucial to ensuring 

America remains a leader in basic research and innovation. 

The first bill is H.R. 4376, the Department of Energy Research Infrastructure Act. This legislation, sponsored by Energy Subcommittee Vice Chairman Steve Knight and Representative Dan 

Lipinski, authorizes funds from the DOE Office of Science budget 

to complete construction of three science infrastructure projects. 

The bill provides upgrades to the ultraviolet and soft x-ray light 

source at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab and the x-ray laser at 

SLAC National Accelerator Lab at Stanford University, ensuring 

that these facilities remain the best in the world. These Advanced 

Light Sources facilitate research in chemistry, physics, biology, 

medicine, and manufacturing. 

The Knight bill also authorizes and directs the construction of 

the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams at Michigan State University 

through the DOE Nuclear Physics program. This first-of-a-kind facility will allow researchers to study a variety of rare isotopes, advancing science discoveries in fields ranging from medicine to astrophysics. 

The next energy bill is H.R. 4377, the Accelerating American 

Leadership in Science Act. This legislation authorizes upgrades to 

the Advanced Photon Source at Argonne National Lab and the 

Spallation Neutron Source at Oak Ridge National Lab. It also 

funds the construction of the Long Baseline Neutrino Facility, 

which, once completed, will be the premiere international facility in 

high-energy physics. 

I want to thank this bill’s sponsors, Representative Randy 

Hultgren and Representative Bill Foster, for their longstanding 

support of basic research and investments in these best-in-theworld science facilities. 

H.R. 4378, the Nuclear Energy Research Infrastructure Act, is our 

third energy bill today. H.R. 4378, sponsored by Energy Subcommittee Chairman Randy Weber and full Committee Ranking 

Member Eddie Bernice Johnson, authorizes funds to construct the 

Versatile Neutron Source, a DOE fast neutron user facility that 

will facilitate the development of the next generation of nuclear reactors by the private sector. Advanced nuclear reactor technology 

provides the best opportunity to make reliable, emission-free electricity available throughout the industrial and developing world. 

This user facility will ensure U.S. companies develop this critical 

advanced reactor technology in the United States. 

Next, we will consider four bipartisan STEM bills. The first is 

H.R. 4375, the STEM Research and Education Efficiency and 

Transparency Act, which requires a report to Congress on the effectiveness of NSF STEM education programs to help determine what 

investments work and which are not effective. The bill also improves the collection and reporting of data on individual Federal re-
317 

search grant applications to ensure transparency. I want thank Research and Technology Subcommittee Chairwoman, Mrs. Comstock, 

and Ranking Member Johnson for their work on STEM issues and 

in particular promoting opportunities for women in STEM. 

The next STEM bill is H.R. 4323, the Supporting Veterans in 

STEM Careers Act, which promotes veteran involvement in STEM 

education and research programs at NSF, including computer 

science and cybersecurity. The bill also establishes a Subcommittee 

at the National Science and Technology Council on veterans and 

military families. 

I thank the lead sponsors of this bill, Congressman Dunn, an 11- 

year Army veteran and M.D.; and Mr. Takano, both Members of 

this Committee and the Veterans Affairs Committee as well. 

I’d also like to acknowledge the six Science Committee Members 

who are original cosponsors of the bill and military veterans: Roger 

Marshall, Barry Loudermilk, Ralph Abraham, Brian Babin, Steve 

Knight, and Jim Banks. 

The third STEM bill is H.R. 4254, the Women in Aerospace Education Act, which strengthens aerospace work force opportunities 

for women. It provides for internships at national labs and NASA 

centers through the NSF Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program and 

NASA fellowship opportunities. I thank the sponsors, Mr. Knight 

and Ms. Esty, for their work on promoting STEM opportunities for 

women. 

And, Ms. Esty, I know you’ve been promoting that for years in 

fact, so nice to come to fruition. 

The fourth STEM bill we will consider is H.R. 3397, the Building 

Blocks of STEM Act, which directs NSF to support STEM education research focused on early childhood. Ms. Rosen and Mr. 

Knight are the sponsors of this bill, and we appreciate their work 

as well. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

Today we will consider seven bills, starting with three energy bills. Together, 

these first three bills direct and authorize upgrades to Department of Energy (DOE) 

facilities across the country. DOE national labs host over 30,000 researchers each 

year. These bills provide infrastructure investments that are crucial to ensuring 

America remains a leader in basic research and innovation. 

The first bill is H.R. 4376, the Department of Energy Research Infrastructure Act. 

This legislation, sponsored by Energy Subcommittee Vice Chairman Steve Knight 

and Rep. Dan Lipinski, authorizes funding from the DOE Office of Science budget 

to complete construction of three science infrastructure projects. 

The bill provides upgrades to the ultraviolet and soft x-ray light source at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab and the x-ray laser at SLAC National Accelerator Lab 

at Stanford University, ensuring that these facilities remain the best in the world. 

These advanced light sources facilitate research in chemistry, physics, biology, 

medicine and manufacturing. 

The Knight bill also authorizes and directs the construction of the Facility for 

Rare Isotope Beams at Michigan State University through the DOE Nuclear Physics 

program. This first-of-a kind facility will allow researchers to study a variety of rare 

isotopes, advancing science discoveries in fields ranging from medicine to astrophysics. 

The next energy bill is H.R. 4377, the Accelerating American Leadership in 

Science Act. This legislation authorizes upgrades to the Advanced Photon Source at 

Argonne National Lab and the Spallation Neutron Source at Oak Ridge National 

Lab. It also funds the construction of the Long Baseline Neutrino Facility, which 

once completed will be the premiere international facility in high-energy physics. 
318 

I want to thank this bill’s sponsors, Rep. Randy Hultgren and Rep. Bill Foster, 

for their long-standing support of basic research and investments in these best in 

the world science facilities. 

H.R. 4378, the Nuclear Energy Research Infrastructure Act is our third energy bill 

today. H.R. 4378, sponsored by Energy Subcommittee Chairman Randy Weber and 

full Committee Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson, authorizes funds to construct the Versatile Neutron Source, a DOE fast neutron user facility that will facilitate the development of the next generation of nuclear reactors by the private sector. 

Advanced nuclear reactor technology provides the best opportunity to make reliable, emission-free electricity available throughout the industrial and developing 

world. 

This user facility will ensure U.S. companies develop this critical advanced reactor 

technology in the United States. 

Next, we will consider four bipartisan STEM bills. 

The first is H.R. 4375, the STEM Research and Education Efficiency and Transparency Act, which requires a report to Congress on the effectiveness of NSF STEM 

education programs to help determine what investments work and which are not 

effective. 

The bill also improves the collection and reporting of data on individual federal 

research grant applications to ensure transparency. 

I thank the Research and Technology Subcommittee Chairwoman, Mrs. Comstock, 

and Ranking Member Johnson for their work on STEM issues and in particular promoting opportunities for women in STEM. 

The next STEM bill is H.R. 4323, the Supporting Veterans in STEM Careers Act, which promotes veteran involvement in STEM education and research programs at 

NSF, including computer science and cybersecurity. 

The bill also establishes a subcommittee at the National Science and Technology 

Council on veterans and military families. 

I thank the lead sponsors of this bill, Congressman Dunn - an 11-year Army veteran and M.D. - and Mr. Takano, both members of this committee and the Veterans 

Affairs Committee as well. 

I’d also like to acknowledge the six Science Committee members who are original 

cosponsors of the bill and military veterans: Roger Marshall, Barry Loudermilk, 

Ralph Abraham, Brian Babin, Steve Knight and Jim Banks. 

The third STEM bill is HR. 4254, the Women in Aerospace Education Act, which 

strengthens aerospace workforce opportunities for women. It provides for internships at national labs and NASA Centers through the NSF Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program and NASA fellowship opportunities. 

I thank the sponsors, Mr. Knight and Ms. Esty, for their work on promoting 

STEM opportunities for women. 

The fourth STEM bill we will consider is H.R. 3397, the Building Blocks of STEM 

Act, which directs NSF to support STEM education research focused on early childhood. Ms. Rosen and Mr. Knight are the sponsors of this bill, and we appreciate 

their work. 

Chairman SMITH. I’ll now recognize the Ranking Member, Eddie 

Bernice Johnson of Texas, for her opening statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Chairman Smith, for holding today’s markup of seven bills, most or all of which should receive bipartisan support. 

Included in today’s markup are four STEM education-related 

bills: The STEM Research and Education Effectiveness and Transparency Act, the Supporting Veterans in STEM Careers Act, the 

Women in Aerospace Education Act, and the Building Blocks of 

STEM Act. I want to voice my support for all of these bills, each 

of which has bipartisan support. 

I myself am cosponsor of the STEM Research and Education Effectiveness and Transparency Act, which includes a section from my 

own STEM Opportunities Act. I strongly believe that encouraging 

STEM education, especially in historically underserved groups is 

vital to ensuring a strong future for all Americans. Each of these 

bills contribute to improving access to STEM education in America, 

and I encourage my colleagues to support them all. 
319 

We are also marking up three bills which promote research at 

the Department of Energy: The Department of Energy Research Infrastructure Act of 2017, the Accelerating American Leadership in 

Science Act of 2017, and the Nuclear Energy Research Infrastructure Act of 2017. I support each of these bills. These bills will help 

to ensure that the Department of Energy has cutting-edge facilities 

to conduct the groundbreaking research we’ve come to expect of the 

Department. 

I’m an original cosponsor of H.R. 4378, which establishes a new 

facility that would be critical for the development of advanced nuclear reactors. If we want American science and industry to remain 

at the forefront, these types of DOE research and user facilities are 

essential. I urge my colleagues to support each of these bills, and 

I thank you, Mr. Smith. I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you, Chairman Smith, for holding today’s markup of seven bills, most or 

all of which should receive bipartisan support. 

Included in today’s markup are four STEM education related bills: The STEM Research and Education Effectiveness and Transparency Act, the Supporting Veterans 

in STEM Careers Act, the Women in Aerospace Education Act, and the Building 

Blocks of STEM Act. I want to voice my support for all of these bills, each of which 

has bipartisan sponsorship. 

I myself am a cosponsor of the STEM Research and Education Effectiveness and 

Transparency Act, which includes a section from my own STEM Opportunities Act. I strongly believe that encouraging STEM education, especially in historically underserved groups, is vital to ensuring a strong future for all Americans. Each of 

these bills contributes to improving access to STEM education in America, and I encourage my colleagues to support them all. 

We are also marking up three bills which promote research at the Department 

of Energy: The Department of Energy Research Infrastructure Act of 2017, the Accelerating American Leadership in Science Act of 2017, and the Nuclear Energy Research Infrastructure Act of 2017. I support each of these bills. 

These bills will help to ensure that the Department of Energy has the cuttingedge facilities to conduct the groundbreaking research we have come to expect of 

the Department. I am an original cosponsor of H.R. 4378, which establishes a new 

facility that will be critical for the development of advanced nuclear reactors. If we 

want American science and industry to remain at the forefront, these types of DOE 

research and user facilities are essential. I urge my colleagues to support each of 

these bills. 

Thank you, Chairman Smith, and I yield back 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

H.R. 4376 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 4376, 

the Department of Energy Research Infrastructure Act of 2017, and 

the clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 4376, a bill to direct the Secretary of Energy 

to carry out certain upgrades to research equipment and the construction of a research user facility and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

And I’ll recognize the sponsor of the bill, the gentleman from 

California, Mr. Knight, for his opening statement. 

Mr. KNIGHT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to 

speak on behalf of this important legislation. 

H.R. 4376, the Department of Energy Research Infrastructure Act 

of 2017, authorizes upgrades and construction of major user facilities at Department of Energy national labs and universities. My 
320 

bill will support the research infrastructure needed to conduct leading basic energy science and nuclear physics research initiatives 

here in the United States. 

The Advanced Light Source (ALS) at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab is a specialized particle accelerator that generates bright 

beams of x-ray light for scientific research. The proposed upgrade 

to this facility will ensure that DOE can maintain ALS’s status as 

a world-class x-ray facility and allow scientists to study the structure and behavior of materials at extremely small scales. 

The Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS) is the world’s first hard 

x-ray, free-electron laser. The proposed upgrade to this facility, located at SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory at Stanford University, will provide a major jump in imaging capability and will enable researchers to perform groundbreaking experiments in chemistry, materials, biology, and energy. 

The Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB) at Michigan State 

University is a one-of-a-kind, linear accelerator user facility that 

will allow researchers to study rare isotopes and their properties. 

This facility will support research that expands our understanding 

of atomic structures and could facilitate discoveries in medicine 

and physics. The research infrastructure authorized by this legislation will open the door for American entrepreneurs to develop the 

next generation of technology and train the next generation of researchers in chemistry, physics, and materials science. H.R. 4376 

reaffirms the Federal Government’s key role in basic research. 

My home State of California has long been a world leader in advanced science and technology and is home to millions of entrepreneurs eager to take advantage of the best research facilities in 

the world. It’s our job in Congress to make sure these facilities stay 

at the cutting edge of science, and keep the next generation of scientists and inventors here in the United States. These key user facility upgrades will enable transformative discoveries in basic 

science, and will give the private sector the tools they need to develop breakthrough technologies in medicine, manufacturing, and 

energy. 

In Congress, it is our responsibility to take a long-term view and 

be patient. Making smart investments can lead to the next big discovery. My bill funds the research infrastructure necessary to make 

those discoveries possible. 

I want to thank the Chairman. I want to thank Representatives 

Lipinski, Chairman Weber, Randy Hultgren for joining me as original cosponsors of this important legislation. I encourage my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my 

time. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. KNIGHT

Thank you Mr. Chairman for the opportunity to speak on behalf of this important 

legislation. 

H.R. 4376, the Department of Energy Research Infrastructure Act of 2017, authorizes upgrades and construction of major user facilities at Department of Energy 

(DOE) national labs and universities. 

My bill will support the research infrastructure needed to conduct leading basic 

energy science and nuclear physics research initiatives here in the U.S. 

The Advanced Light Source at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab is a specialized 

particle accelerator that generates bright beams of x-ray light for scientific research. 

The proposed upgrade to this facility will ensure that DOE can maintain ALS’s sta-
321 

tus as a world-class x-ray facility, and allow scientists to study the structure and 

behavior of materials at extremely small scales. 

The Linac Coherent Light Source is the world’s first hard X-ray, free-electron 

laser. The proposed upgrade to this facility, located at SLAC National Accelerator 

Laboratory at Stanford University, will provide a major jump in imaging capability 

and will enable researchers to perform groundbreaking experiments in chemistry, 

materials, biology and energy. 

The Facility for Rare Isotope Beams at Michigan State University is a one-of-akind, linear accelerator user facility that will allow researchers to study rare isotopes and their properties. This facility will support research that expands our understanding of atomic structures, and could facilitate discoveries in medicine and 

physics. 

The research infrastructure authorized by this legislation will open the door for 

American entrepreneurs to develop the next generation of technology, and train the 

next generation of researchers in chemistry, physics and materials science. 

H.R. 4376 reaffirms the federal government’s key role in basic research. My home 

state of California has long been a world leader in advanced science and technology 

and is home to millions of entrepreneurs eager to take advantage of the best research facilities in the world. It’s our job in Congress to make sure these facilities 

stay at the cutting edge of science, and keep the next generation of scientists and 

inventors here in the United States. 

These key user facility upgrades will enable transformative discoveries in basic 

science, and will give the private sector the tools they need to develop breakthrough 

technologies in medicine, manufacturing and energy. 

In Congress, it is our responsibility to take the long-term view and be patient, 

making smart investments that can lead to the next big discovery. My bill funds 

the research infrastructure necessary to make those discoveries possible. 

I want to thank Rep. Dan Lipinski, Chairman Lamar Smith, Energy Subcommittee Chairman Randy Weber and Rep. Randy Hultgren for joining me as 

original cosponsors of this important legislation. 

I encourage my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my 

time. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you, Mr. Knight. 

And the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Lipinski, is recognized. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for bringing 

forth these bipartisan bills today. 

I want to thank my colleague from California, Mr. Knight, for introducing this bill. I’m very happy to join him on the bill. I also— 

I mention my support for the next two bills that we are going to 

be considering: The Accelerating American Leadership in Science 

Act and Nuclear Energy Infrastructure Act. All these bills authorize 

funding for critical research facilities that are within the Department of Energy. The projects funded by these bills will support 

world-class research facilities that are important for advancing 

fields of energy, medicine, material science, geology, chemistry, and 

many others. Not only do these research facilities advance our scientific understanding, they also serve as tools to improve our national security and support new product development. 

One of the projects being authorized today is the Advanced Photon Source Upgrade at Argonne National Lab, which is in my district and also in Mr. Foster’s district. 

In addition to universities around the country, its user community for the Advanced Photon Source include major corporations 

such as Dow Chemical, Ford Motor Company, and GE, so it has a 

great user base, very important for industry. 

All of these large-scale DOE research tools are national assets of 

a scale that only a Federal Government can provide, and it’s our 

investment in them that makes the United States a world leader 

in research and innovation. 
322 

I want to urge my colleagues to support all these bills, and I will 

yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski. 

And the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson, is recognized for 

her statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

This legislation includes authorizations of important upgrades for 

Department of Energy user facilities that are really vital to the 

U.S. scientific enterprise. Our laboratories are the crown jewels of 

American innovation, and the user-driven science facilities at those 

laboratories and at our universities are the foundation on which 

our leadership in science is built. I’m very pleased to see this bipartisan effort to expand our research capabilities of DOE, and I’m 

sure this is an area in which we can continue to work together. 

I strongly support the passage of H.R. 4376, the Department of 

Energy Research Infrastructure Act of 2017, and I hope my colleagues will join me in ensuring that this swift consideration goes 

to the floor. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

This legislation includes authorizations of important upgrades to Department of 

Energy user facilities that are vital to the U.S. scientific enterprise. Our laboratories 

are the crown jewels of American innovation and the user-driven science facilities 

at those laboratories and at our universities are the foundation on which our leadership in science is built. 

I am very pleased to see this bipartisan effort to expand our research capabilities 

at DOE. I am sure this is an area in which we can continue to work together. 

I strongly support the passage of H.R. 4376, the Department of Energy Research 

Infrastructure Act of 2017 and I hope my colleagues will join me in ensuring its 

swift consideration on the House floor. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

If there’s no further discussion, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 4376 to the House with the recommendation 

that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 4376 to the House. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

H.R. 4376 is ordered reported to the House. 

I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any 

necessary technical and conforming changes, and without objection, 

so ordered. 

H.R. 4377 

Chairman SMITH. We will now go to H.R. 4377, and pursuant to 

notice, I call up H.R. 4377, the Accelerating American Leadership 

in Science Act of 2017, and the clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 4377, a bill to direct the Secretary of Energy 

to carry out an upgrade to research equipment and construction 

and construct research user facilities and for other purposes. 
323 

Chairman SMITH. And without objection, the bill is read—considered as read and open for amendment at any point. 

I’ll recognize the sponsor of the bill, Mr. Hultgren, for his statement. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Thank you so much, Chairman Smith. Thank 

you, and I want to let you know how much I appreciate your work 

on this, Chairman, and the Committee’s work to get this legislation 

moving forward. I’d also like to thank my colleagues from Illinois, 

Mr. Foster and Mr. Lipinski, for their support on this legislation. 

And I commend the Chairman of the Energy Subcommittee, Mr. 

Weber, and the gentleman from California, Mr. Knight, for their 

work on this bill and other legislation to maintain American leadership in research infrastructure. 

I’d like to express my strong support for H.R. 4377, the Accelerating American Leadership in Science Act. This legislation authorizes priority research needs at our national laboratories and 

comes after extensive work with the scientific community and the 

Department of Energy Advisory Committees laying out a responsible path forward for America to maintain and build on our leadership role in scientific research. 

Last night, the American winners of this year’s Nobel Prize visited Washington, DC, and had a reception at the Ambassador of 

Sweden’s residence. The prize ceremony in Sweden will be early 

next month. 

We have the bulk of this year’s winners, which is not unusual. 

The United States has nearly three times the number of Nobel 

Laureates than any other country. And this is not by chance. Before World War II, most countries were neck-and-neck. After the 

war, America realized that leadership in science was vital for our 

national security, as well as for our competitiveness. It was our national labs, borne out of the Manhattan Project, that gave our research community access the tools which no one university or company could ever maintain. This legislation continues our commitment to American leadership. 

This bill authorizes construction of the Long Baseline Neutrino 

Facility, which this Committee heard about when it was first proposed by the High Energy Physics Advisory Panel’s P5 report. I 

was at the groundbreaking of the far site in South Dakota earlier 

this year, and the international community has already pledge support for—of over $100 million dollars to be a part of this. This is 

an exciting time in science where more projects are becoming international. 

Upgrades to the Advanced Photon Source maintain our leadership status in x-ray science, which have applications that have led 

to two Nobel Prizes in chemistry, as well as treatments for HIV 

and improvements in advanced manufacturing. These upgrades are 

again responding to the research community, and APS is already 

serving more than 6,000 researchers every year. 

Upgrades to the Oak Ridge Spallation Neutron Source were 

again called out by the Basic Energy Science Advisory Committee, 

calling these upgrades, and I quote, ‘‘absolutely central to contribute to world-leading science,’’ end quote. These upgrades would 

give the United States the most intense pulsed neutron beam in 

the world, serving researchers looking at material properties at the 
324 

atomic level. Again, I’d like to thank my colleagues for their work 

on this legislation and I urge passage by this Committee as we try 

to bring this to the floor. 

And with that, Chairman, I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. HULTGREN

Thank you chairman, and I appreciate your and the committee’s work on this legislation. 

I’d also like to thank my colleagues from Illinois, Reps. Foster and Lipinski, for 

their support on this legislation. And I commend the Chairman of the Energy Subcommittee, Mr. Weber, and the gentleman from California, Mr. Knight, for their 

work on this bill and other legislation to maintain American leadership in research 

infrastructure. 

I’d like to express my strong support for H.R. 4377, the Accelerating American 

Leadership in Science Act. This legislation authorizes priority research needs at our 

national laboratories and comes after extensive work with the scientific community, 

and the Department of Energy Advisory Committees, laying out a responsible path 

forward for America to maintain, and build on, our leadership role in scientific research. 

Last night the American winners of this year’s Nobel prizes visited Washington, 

D.C., and had a reception at the Ambassador of Sweden’s residence. The Prize ceremony in Sweden will be early next month. We have the bulk of this year’s winners, 

which is not unusual. The United States has nearly three times the number of 

Nobel Laureates than any other country. And this is not by chance. Before World 

War Two, most countries were neck-in-neck. After the war, America realized that 

leadership in science was vital for our national security as well as our competitiveness. It was our National Labs, born out of the Manhattan Project, that gave our 

research community access the tools which no one university or company could ever 

maintain. 

This legislation continues our commitment to American leadership. 

This bill authorizes construction of the Long Baseline Neutrino Facility, which 

this committee heard about when it was first proposed by the High Energy Physics 

Advisory Panel’s P5 report. I was at the ground breaking of the far site in South 

Dakota earlier this year, and the international community has already pledge support for over 100 million dollars to be a part. This is an exciting time in science 

where more projects are becoming international, which we should build on. 

Upgrades to the Advanced Photon Source (APS) maintain our leadership status 

in xray science, which have applications that have led to two Nobel prizes in chemistry, as well as treatments for HIV and improvements in advanced manufacturing. 

These upgrades are again responding to the research community, and APS is already serving more than 6,000 researchers every year. 

Upgrades to the Oak Ridge Spallation Neutron Source were again called out by 

the Basic Energy Science Advisory Committee, calling these upgrades ‘‘absolutely 

central to contribute to world leading science.’’ These upgrades would give the 

United States the most intense pulsed neutron beam in the world, serving researchers looking at material properties at the atomic level. 

Again, I would like to thank my colleagues for their work on this legislation and 

I urge passage by the committee as we try to bring this to the floor. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Hultgren. 

And the—another gentleman from Illinois is recognized for his 

opening statement, Mr. Foster. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, Chairman Smith and Ranking Member 

Johnson, for holding this markup. I am proud to be offering this 

bipartisan bill with my colleague, Mr. Hultgren from Illinois, to authorize funding for three important projects: Argonne’s Advanced 

Photon Source, Fermilab’s Long Baseline Neutrino Facility, and 

Oak Ridge’s Spallation Neutron Source Proton Power Upgrade. I 

also want to thank Mr. Knight and Mr. Lipinski, Mr. Weber, and 

Chairman Smith for their support as cosponsors of this bill as well. 

The United States has been at the forefront of innovation and 

progress largely due to our investment in scientific research. The 

Department of Energy laboratories have made scientific discoveries 
325 

that will be in the science textbooks forever and have helped raise 

the standard of living for millions of Americans. This scientific 

progress requires us to take a long view. Discoveries—most discoveries are not made overnight, and experiments need sustained attention and resources for us to learn from them. Similarly, our scientific infrastructure requires long-term sustained funding to ensure opportunities are not missed. 

Experiments conducted at Argonne National Laboratory’s Advanced Photon Source, or APS, support both discovery science and 

market-driven research. Pharmaceutical research at the APS has 

yielded lifesaving new drugs for HIV, melanoma, and renal cell carcinoma. Industrial chemists have used the APS to develop energysaving solar shingles while combustion researchers have developed 

a process that’s led to cleaner diesel engines. And research conducted at the APS led to a Nobel Prize in chemistry in 2012 for 

work on G coupled protein receptors, which are helping us develop 

more effective medications to aid in our fight against opioid addiction. 

The APS needs to be upgraded to ensure American scientists and 

companies continue to have access to the best scientific equipment 

in the world. The APS upgrade will use next-generation technology 

to make the APS hundreds of times brighter, opening up scientific 

frontiers at the nanoscale that are completely inaccessible today. 

The upgrade leverages the existing infrastructure, valued at about 

$1.5 billion, while applying new technologies to create a world-leading facility at substantially less cost than a new facility. This technology includes some really incredible magnets that someone who 

has spent a lot of his life optimizing magnet pole tip designs, these 

are right at the edge of what is possible, and I have great respect 

for our ability to pull this off. With this upgrade, the APS will become the ultimate 3-D microscope, and without it, the United 

States would lose its leadership in x-ray science to Europe, Japan, 

and China. 

The second critical project this bill authorizes is the LBNF 

DUNE project, which is critical to maintaining U.S. leadership in 

high-energy physics and fundamental science. This facility, located 

at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Illinois, 

where I worked for 25 years and raised my family, and also at the 

Stanford—Sanford Underground Research Facility in Lead, South 

Dakota, will be the first major international world-class facility to 

be hosted by the United States. 

Neutrinos are most—among the most abundant and fascinating 

particles in the universe, and understanding their nature may provide the key to understanding some of the most fundamental questions about the nature of our universe. LBNF DUNE would be the 

most powerful tool in the world to study these particles and would 

help solidify the Department of Energy’s high-energy physics program as a world leader. More than 770 scientists from 150 institutions in 26 countries stand ready to contribute scientifically and 

with materials to the LBNF DUNE project, and I urge this Subcommittee to provide full and robust funding for the Department 

of Energy’s high-energy physics account. 

And finally, the third project authorizes the Oak Ridge Spallation Neutron Source Proton Power Upgrade. Oak Ridge’s National 
326 

Laboratory’s Spallation Neutron Source is the most powerful 

pulsed neutron experimental facility in the world. It provides researchers with a variety—in a variety of different disciplines with 

the capabilities to make precise measurements and answer the crucial fundamental questions that drive their research. But there are 

international competitors particularly in Europe that are challenging that leadership. 

The proposal upgrades included in this bill, the second target 

station and proton power upgrade, will enable this facility to significantly increase the number of academic and industrial researchers that it can serve and to maintain its world-leading capabilities. 

I’d also like to take note of the Department of Energy’s very 

thoughtful leadership of this project from the start. One of the 

toughest things in a new project is trying to figure out how much 

scope to leave for potential upgrades, and it was done very well and 

very intelligently in the initial Spallation Neutron Source design. 

It’s making this upgrade much cheaper than it would have been 

had it simply been taped on at the end of the project. 

Investments in these projects and our broader scientific infrastructure are the only way to ensure that America remains an 

international leader. 

Thank you, and I urge my colleagues to support this bill and 

yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Foster. 

And the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson, is recognized for 

her opening statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Similar to the previous bill, this legislation would authorize upgrades to the Department of Energy’s user facilities that were recommended by the Basic Energy Science Advisory Committee. These 

upgrades are critical to U.S. leadership in fundamental science and 

are important tools for industry and university researchers. These 

investments could significantly expand the number of users that 

can access these facilities. 

On that note, I’m encouraged to see the inclusion of explicit authorization levels in the bill that we are considering today. 

I’d like to thank Congressman Foster for his work on the Committee in highlighting the value of these user facilities, and of 

course he has personal experience. He is likely the only Member of 

Congress who can draw on his personal experience in supporting 

this work. 

And I hope we can continue this bipartisan collaboration to authorize other vital research activities at the Federal science agencies that we oversee. I strongly encourage my colleagues to support 

and join me in voting for the bill. 

And I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Similar to the previous bill, this legislation would authorize upgrades to Department of Energy user facilities that were recommended by the Basic Energy Science 

Advisory Committee. These upgrades are critical to U.S. leadership in fundamental 

science and are important tools for industry and university researchers. These investments could significantly expand the number of users that can access these facilities. On that note, I am encouraged to see the inclusion of explicit authorization 

levels in the bills we are considering today. 
327 

I would like to thank Congressman Foster’s for his work on the Committee in 

highlighting the value of these user facilities. He is likely the only Member of Congress that can draw on his personal experience in supporting this work. I hope we 

can continue this bipartisan collaboration to authorize other vital research activities 

at the Federal science agencies that we oversee. 

I strongly encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

If there’s no further discussion, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 4377 to the House with the recommendation 

that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 4377. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

H.R. 4377 is ordered reported to the House. 

And I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make 

any necessary technical and conforming changes. Without objection, so ordered. 

H.R. 4378 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 4378, 

the Nuclear Energy Research Infrastructure Act of 2017. And the 

clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 4378, a bill to direct the Secretary of Energy 

to carry out the construction of the Versatile Reactor Base Fast 

Neutron Source and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

And the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Weber, the Chairman of the 

Energy Subcommittee, is recognized for his opening statement. 

Mr. WEBER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning. And I appreciate the opportunity to speak on this critical legislation. 

I want to thank you and Ranking Member Johnson for cosponsoring H.R. 4378, the Nuclear Energy Research Infrastructure Act 

of 2017, and quite frankly for you all’s leadership in advocating for 

nuclear energy research and development. 

I am grateful for the opportunity to work alongside my fellow 

Texans and the other Members of this Committee to support research projects that will keep America safe, globally competitive, 

and encourage nuclear innovation. 

Last Congress, this Committee held hearings, met with stakeholders, and worked extensively with our colleagues in the Senate 

to draft the Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act. This comprehensive, bipartisan authorization bill directed the DOE, Department of Energy, to invest in supercomputing capabilities, create a 

framework for DOE to partner with the private sector to host prototype development for advanced reactors, and laid out a clear 

timeline and parameters for DOE to complete a research reactor. 

This bill passed the House three times last Congress and passed 

the House again in January as a part of the DOE Research and Innovation Act. 
328 

The research reactor, or Versatile Neutron Source, authorized in 

that bill is crucial for the development of advanced reactor designs, 

materials, and nuclear fuels. This type of research requires access 

to fast neutrons, which are currently only available for civilian research in Russia. While modeling and simulation can accelerate 

R&D, nuclear energy research must be validated through a physical source, like a research reactor. Today, we will consider my bill 

to authorize specific funding to build that research reactor. 

H.R. 4378 allocates funds from within the DOE Office of Nuclear 

Energy for the construction of the Versatile Neutron Source. This 

facility is a reactor-based, fast neutron source that will operate as 

an open-access user facility in the DOE national lab system and 

will facilitate academic and proprietary research in the United 

States. Access to fast neutrons is a critical part of the development 

of next-generation materials and fuels for advanced nuclear reactor 

technology. 

The Versatile Neutron Source will also enable the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to verify data on new fuels, materials, and designs more efficiently, expediting regulatory approval for advanced 

nuclear reactors. Without this user facility, this research simply 

will not take place. We cannot afford to lose the ability to develop 

innovative nuclear technology, and we cannot rely on international 

partners to develop safe and secure advanced reactors. 

And as more developing nations look to nuclear energy to grow 

their economies, America must maintain our nuclear capabilities 

and continue to develop cutting-edge technology here at home. Let 

me add from a national security perspective, we want—no, make 

that we must have nuclear superiority. And so this bill will also 

help maintain that capability for America to influence security and 

proliferation standards around the world by maintaining cuttingedge nuclear science. 

By building this user facility, we will fortify the U.S. commitment to safely advancing nuclear technology. H.R. 4378 will authorize funding to construct this critical user facility and ensure 

that we keep the best nuclear scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs working right here in the United States. 

I encourage my colleagues to support this bill, and, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. WEBER

Good morning. Thank you Chairman Smith for the opportunity to speak on this 

critical legislation. I want to thank you and Ranking Member Johnson for cosponsoring H.R. 4378, the Nuclear Energy Research Infrastructure Act of 2017, and for 

y’all’s leadership in advocating for nuclear energy research and development. I’m 

grateful for the opportunity to work alongside my fellow Texans and the other members of this committee to support research projects that will keep America safe and 

globally competitive and encourage nuclear innovation. 

Last Congress, this committee held hearings, met with stakeholders and worked 

extensively with our colleagues in the Senate to draft the Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act. This comprehensive, bipartisan authorization bill directed the Department of Energy (DOE) to invest in supercomputing capabilities, created a framework for DOE 

to partner with the private sector to host prototype development for advanced reactors and laid out a clear timeline and parameters for DOE to complete a research 

reactor. This bill passed the House three times last Congress, and passed the House 

again in January as a part of the DOE Research and Innovation Act. 

The research reactor, or Versatile Neutron Source, authorized in that bill is crucial for the development of advanced reactor designs, materials and nuclear fuels. 
329 

This type of research requires access to fast neutrons - which are currently only 

available for civilian research in Russia. While modeling and simulation can accelerate R&D, nuclear energy research must be validated through a physical source, 

like a research reactor. 

Today, we will consider my bill to authorize specific funding to build that research 

reactor. H.R. 4378 allocates funds from within the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy 

for the construction of the Versatile Neutron Source. This facility is a reactor based, 

fast neutron source that will operate as an open-access user facility in the DOE national lab system, and will facilitate academic and proprietary research in the 

United States. 

Access to fast neutrons is a critical part of the development of next generation 

materials and fuels for advanced nuclear reactor technology. The Versatile Neutron 

Source will also enable the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to verify data on new 

fuels, materials and designs more efficiently, expediting regulatory approval for advanced nuclear reactors. 

Without this user facility, this research simply will not take place. We can’t afford 

to lose the ability to develop innovative nuclear technology, or rely on international 

partners to develop safe and secure advanced reactors. 

And as more developing nations look to nuclear energy to grow their economies, 

America must maintain our nuclear capabilities and continue to develop cutting 

edge technology here at home. 

This bill will also help maintain America’s capability to influence security and 

proliferation standards around the world by maintaining cutting edge nuclear 

science. By building this user facility, we will fortify the U.S. commitment to safely 

advancing nuclear technology. 

H.R. 4378 will authorize funding to construct this critical user facility and ensure 

that we keep the best nuclear scientists, engineers and entrepreneurs working in 

the United States. 

I encourage my colleagues to support this bill and I reserve the balance of my 

time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Weber. 

And the gentlewoman from Texas and original cosponsor of the 

legislation is recognized for her statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I’m pleased 

to cosponsor this bill with Congressman Weber. This legislation 

marks another accomplishment in our continued collaboration to 

advance nuclear energy innovation. 

Nuclear power plays a vital role in providing our country with 

clean, reliable energy, but they are current technical, economic, and 

policy challenges that prevent nuclear energy from playing a larger 

role in enabling our clean energy future. This bill, the Nuclear Energy Research Infrastructure Act, would help address these challenges. It expands on a provision included in another bill that I cosponsored with Mr. Weber and the Chairman, H.R. 431, the Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act, which passed the House 

in January on a voice vote as part of yet another bill that I cosponsored with these two gentlemen, H.R. 589, the Department of Energy Research And Innovation Act. 

The bill we are considering today would provide the Department 

of Energy the direction and funding it needs to create a national 

user facility with critical capabilities to advance nuclear technologies in America. I am hoping that if we provide our scientists 

and industry leaders with the right tools, they can fulfill the promise of clean nuclear energy that is safer, less expensive, more efficient, and produces less waste than the current fleet of reactors. 

I’m also strongly supportive of the inclusion of the explicit funding levels as part of this authorization. Providing the Department 

and congressional appropriators with a funding profile for research 

activities and projects is a crucial responsibility in our role as an 

authorizing committee. In particular, this helps to ensure that con-
330 

struction of cutting-edge research facilities like this one has the resources they need to be completed on time and on budget, thus 

making sure that the U.S. taxpayers, who are footing these bills, 

are getting the most value for their hard-earned dollars. 

I hope we can continue to include funding authorizations in future bills passed out of this Committee, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle as we work to 

strengthen America’s research enterprise across all of our agencies. 

I encourage my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the 

balance of time. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to cosponsor this bill with Congressman 

Weber. 

This legislation marks another accomplishment in our continued collaboration to 

advance nuclear energy innovation. 

Nuclear power plays a vital role in providing our country with clean, reliable energy. But there are currently technical, economic, and policy challenges that prevent 

nuclear energy from playing a larger role in enabling our clean energy future. 

This bill, the Nuclear Energy Research Infrastructure Act, would help address 

these challenges. It expands on a provision included in another bill that I cosponsored with Mr. Weber and the Chairman - H.R. 431, the Nuclear Energy Innovation 

Capabilities Act - which passed the House in January on voice vote as part of yet 

another bill that I cosponsored with these two gentlemen - H.R. 589, the Department 

of Energy Research and Innovation Act. 

The bill we are considering today would provide the Department of Energy the 

direction and funding it needs to create a national user facility with critical capabilities to advance nuclear technologies in America. I am hopeful that if we provide our 

scientists and industry leaders with the right tools, they can fulfill the promise of 

clean nuclear energy that is safer, less expensive, more efficient, and produces less 

waste than the current fleet of reactors. 

I also strongly support the inclusion of explicit funding levels as a part of this 

authorization. Providing the Department and Congressional appropriators with a 

funding profile for research activities and projects is a crucial responsibility in our 

role as an authorizing committee. In particular, this helps ensure that construction 

of cutting edge research facilities like this one have the resources they need to be 

completed on time and on budget, thus making sure that the U.S. taxpayers who 

are footing these bills are getting the most value for their hard-earned dollars. 

I hope we can continue to include funding authorizations in future bills passed 

out of the Committee and I look forward to working with my colleagues on both 

sides of the aisle as we work to strengthen America’s research enterprise across all 

of our agencies. 

I encourage my colleagues to support the bill, and I yield back the balance of my 

time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

If there’s no further amendments—— 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SMITH. Yes. Who—the gentleman from California, Mr. 

Rohrabacher, is recognized. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I just would like to make sure we go on 

record when we’re—and I support this legislation, but I’d like to go 

on record that we do need to look into new approaches when it 

comes to nuclear energy. For far too long we have been relying on 

basically concepts and technology that were developed 60 and 70 

years ago. Light water reactors, while they—I believe they’ve been 

successful in providing us a great deal of electricity, they are inherently dangerous and, for example, in the San Onofre nuclear power 

plant in Orange County is now closed, and it’s costing the taxpayers $70 million a year simply to oversee that facility that’s now 
331 

closed because the nuclear waste from those years is sitting right 

there. 

Now, I would hope that the money that is—that we are spending 

in this bill will not go to try to tweak light-water reactors and build 

the same type of systems. Instead, we are capable now of building 

small modular nuclear reactors that are safe, that will—cannot 

melt down, will not leave plutonium behind that can make bombs, 

and in fact will have a minimum of any type of waste as compared 

to light-water reactors. 

So as we move forward with this particular research project that 

we’re talking about right now, I would hope that we are on the 

record as saying let’s break some new ground. Let’s open up the 

new horizons instead of just trying to perfect the old systems and 

improve them a little bit. 

And we also have to understand—and I think nuclear energy offers a tremendous source of clean energy as it has, but there was 

a price to that in the past that if we do it right now, we change 

this and go to a technology that we are capable of building, we can 

really endow future generations of Americans with clean energy 

that doesn’t have the downside, which is the dangers of radiation 

material. 

By the way, the new reactors will be able to use the waste from 

light-water reactors that are left over for their own fuel to produce 

energy for future generations. It’s win-win, but I have seen a great 

hesitancy on the part of the industry to commit themselves to this 

new approach to nuclear energy. 

And I would just say this, that we also have to pay attention in 

this Committee not only to the technology development but understanding that the technology development is step one, and I would 

sure hope that after we do develop new sources of nuclear energy 

that we go into the licensing procedures. We have been—there are 

so many restrictions now on new technology, especially in the nuclear field, that it takes decades to even think about it. And we 

were capable of building the type of light-water reactors I’m talking 

about, Mr. Chairman—we were capable of this 10, 15 years ago, 

and we’ve gone nowhere on it because the licensing requirements 

are so restrictive that it’s holding back progress. 

So with that said, I would support this legislation. I think it’s 

terrific that we have this type of bipartisan approach to something 

that could well—and will if we succeed and we will succeed at it— 

ensure that future generations of Americans do have the type of 

wealth and—the wealth and the other—and that clean environment and energy that is necessary for people to have decent lives. 

Ordinary people in this country deserve a decent life, and we are 

laying the foundation for that today. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher, for those comments. 

If there are no further amendments, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 4378 to the House with the recommendation 

that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 4378 to the House. 

All those in favor, say aye. 
332 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

H.R. 4378 is ordered reported to the House. 

I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any 

necessary technical and conforming changes, and without objection, 

so ordered. 

H.R. 4375 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 4375. 

We just didn’t do that, did we—the STEM Research and Education 

Effectiveness and Transparency Act. And the clerk will report the 

bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 4375, a bill to provide for study on broadening 

participation on certain National Science Foundation research and 

education programs, to collect data on Federal research grants to 

science agencies, and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

I’ll now recognize the sponsor of the bill, Mrs. Comstock, for her 

opening statement. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

H.R. 4375, the STEM Research and Education Effectiveness and 

Transparency Act, contains two provision aimed at providing better 

information on how to make taxpayer-funded investments in STEM 

and research and development more effective, transparent, and 

fair. 

First, the bill requires the National Science Foundation for the 

first time to report and make recommendations to Congress regarding the effectiveness of its research and education programs aimed 

at broadening the participation of women and historically underrepresented individuals and minorities in STEM. This report will 

give Congress, NSF, and other stakeholders objective information 

about what kinds of interventions and assistance are efficient, scalable, and effective. 

In order to have a vibrant economy that provides opportunity 

and prosperity for all, we must be the leader in STEM fields. To 

do that, we need to develop the talent of all Americans. We cannot 

afford to leave anyone behind. This report will help us focus resources on the best and most effective methods. 

Second, the bill requires all Federal science agencies to collect 

standardized information, including demographics, for each application received for research and development grants. Agencies are 

to submit the information annually to NSF, which is directed to 

publish an annual statistical summary. This information will provide better transparency to how taxpayer dollars are spent on research and scientists across the Federal Government. 

I want to thank Ranking Member Johnson for joining me in 

sponsoring this bill and for her longtime commitment to ensuring 

STEM opportunities and advancement for all. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your support as well, and I yield 

back. 
333 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MRS. COMSTOCK

Mr. Chairman, H.R. 4375, the STEM Research and Education Effectiveness and 

Transparency Act, contains two provisions aimed at providing better information on 

how to make taxpayer-funded investments in STEM and research and development 

more effective, transparent and fair. First, the bill requires the National Science 

Foundation (NSF) - for the first time - to report and make recommendations to Congress regarding the effectiveness of its research and education programs aimed at 

broadening the participation of women and historically underrepresented individuals and minorities in STEM. 

This report will give Congress, NSF and other stakeholders objective information 

about what kinds of interventions and assistance are efficient, scalable and effective. 

In order to have a vibrant economy that provides opportunity and prosperity for 

all, we must be the leader in STEM fields. To do that, we need to develop the talent 

of all Americans. We cannot afford to leave anyone behind. This report will help us 

focus resources on the best and most effective methods. 

Second, the bill requires all federal science agencies to collect standardized information, including demographics, for each application received for research and developments grants. Agencies are to submit the information annually to NSF, which 

is directed to publish an annual statistical summary. 

This information will provide better transparency to how taxpayer dollars are 

spent on research and scientists across the federal government. 

I want to thank Ranking Member Johnson for joining me in sponsoring this bill 

and for her longtime commitment to ensuring STEM opportunities and advancements for all. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your support as well. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mrs. Comstock. 

And the Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from Texas and 

original cosponsor of the legislation, is recognized for her opening 

statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I want 

to thank Congresswoman Comstock for introducing H.R. 4375, the 

STEM Research and Education Effectiveness Transparency Act. I’m 

pleased to cosponsor this good legislation. H.R. 4375 is a small but 

important step forward for addressing longstanding gaps in 

achievement and participation in the sciences. 

Research has shown that the observed shortages of women and 

minorities in STEM fields are not due to the lack of interest. To 

better understand the barriers faced by women and underrepresented minority groups in STEM, researchers and policymakers 

need access to better data on what really works to improve the recruitment and retention of women and minorities in STEM studies 

and careers. Importantly, we must also collect data that would reveal any inequities that originate within the Federal agencies 

themselves, even if unintentionally. 

The bill directs the National Science Foundation to compile and 

report on all available data on the effectiveness of its portfolio of 

broadening participation programs. National Science Foundation 

must also identify what additional data would be needed to understand what makes programs effective. I commend NSF on the 

strides it has taken in recent years to accelerate its efforts to address the underrepresentation of women and minorities in STEM, 

but we need to ensure that they are producing results. 

This bill also includes one provision from my STEM Opportunities Act that requires all Federal science agencies to collect and report annually on data for all research grant applications and 

awards. These data are essential to uncovering my inequities—any 

inequities in Federal funding for STEM research and to developing 

smart policies to address the implicit biases that are typically behind such inequities. 
334 

I continue to ask my good friend, Chairman Smith—— 

Chairman SMITH. Yes. 

Ms. JOHNSON [continuing]. My hero here, to take up the entire—— 

Chairman SMITH. Get that down in writing fast. 

Ms. JOHNSON [continuing]. Of my STEM Opportunities Act, which has been very well vetted by many experts, and I’m encouraged by this first small step. 

I will say that I started this when Ms.—when Congresswoman 

Connie Morella and I did our first study on this Committee, and 

I’m still pleading for the same goal. 

Thank you and I yield back. Do this before you leave. Thank you. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

I want to thank Chairwoman Comstock for introducing H.R. 4375, the STEM Research and Education Effectiveness Transparency Act. I am pleased to cosponsor this 

good legislation. H.R. 4375 is a small but important step forward for addressing 

long-standing gaps in achievement and participation in the sciences. Research has 

shown that the observed shortages of women and minorities in STEM fields are not 

due to a lack of interest. To better understand the barriers faced by women and 

underrepresented minority groups in STEM, researchers and policy-makers need access to better data on what really works to improve the recruitment and retention 

of women and minorities in STEM studies and careers. Importantly, we must also 

collect data that would reveal any inequities that originate within the federal agencies themselves, even if unintentionally. The bill directs the National Science Foundation to compile and report on all available data on the effectiveness of its portfolio 

of broadening participation programs. NSF must also identify what additional data 

would be needed to understand what makes programs effective. I commend NSF on 

the strides it has taken in recent years to accelerate its efforts to address the underrepresentation of women and minorities in STEM, but we need to ensure they are 

producing results. This bill also includes one provision from my STEM Opportunities 

Act that requires all federal science agencies to collect and report annually on data 

for all research grant applications and awards. These data are essential to uncovering any inequities in federal funding for STEM research, and to developing smart 

policies to address the implicit biases that are typically behind such inequities. I 

continue to ask my friend Chairman Smith to take up the entirety of my STEM Opportunities Act, which has been very well vetted by many experts. I am encouraged 

by this first small step, so I won’t give up. Thank you, I yield back the balance of 

my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. We will renew our efforts and take another look and give it a good-faith effort. 

If there is no further discussion, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 4375 to the House with the recommendation 

that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 4375 to the House. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

and H.R. 4375 is ordered reported to the House. 

I ask unanimous consent that the staff be authorized to make 

any necessary technical and conforming changes. Without objection, so ordered. 

H.R. 4323 

Next up, H.R. 4323. And pursuant to notice, I call up H.R. 4323, 

the Supporting Veterans in STEM Careers Act. And the clerk will 

report the bill. 
335 

The CLERK. H.R. 4323, a bill to promote veteran involvement in 

STEM education, computer science, and scientific research, and for 

other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

I’ll now recognize the sponsor of the bill, Mr. Dunn, for his opening statement. 

Mr. DUNN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

H.R. 4223, the Supporting Veterans in STEM Careers Act—— Chairman SMITH. Wait a minute. 

Mr. DUNN. Come back on. The Supporting Veterans in STEM Careers Act is about helping expand veterans’ job and education opportunities in the sciences. The bill requires the National Science 

Foundation to develop a veterans’ outreach plan and publish data 

on veterans’ participation in science, technology, engineering, and 

mathematics fields in its annual indicators report. 

The bill also updates the NSF Noyce Teacher Scholarship program, fellowship programs, and cyber grant programs to include 

outreach to veterans. 

Additionally, the White House Office of Science and Technology 

Policy is tasked with overseeing an interagency working group examining how to increase veteran participation in STEM career 

fields, including addressing any barriers to servicemembers and 

their spouses. 

In the next 5 years, between 1 and 1.5 million members of the 

U.S. Armed Forces will leave the military according to the DOD. 

Many of these veterans will be seeking new careers by—and by a 

wide margin, veterans cite finding employment as their numberone need when returning home. 

According to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, occupations in the 

STEM fields is projected to grow to more than 9 million by 2020, 

an increase of a million jobs. Research shows that many military 

veterans have skills and training that align with STEM careers, 

particularly in information technology. However, it also shows that 

veterans face many barriers as they reenter the work force, including a lack of formal STEM education career guidance and the difficult task of transferring military credits to civilian college credits. 

Our nation’s veterans deserve every opportunity to transition to 

a healthy and successful civilian life, and this bill will help our 

servicemembers continue to serve our Nation in new ways by filling 

21st century jobs and keeping America on the cutting edge of innovation. 

I thank Mr. Takano, the Ranking Vice Chair of the Veterans Affairs Committee that we both have the privilege to serve on, for cosponsoring this bipartisan legislation. And I salute my fellow veterans on the Committee who join me in introducing this bill. 

And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your support as well. I urge 

my colleagues to support the bill, and I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. DUNN

H.R. 4223, the Supporting Veterans in STEM Careers Act, is about helping expand 

veterans’ job and education opportunities in the sciences. 

The bill requires the National Science Foundation (NSF) to develop a veterans’ 

outreach plan and publish data on veterans’ participation in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields in its annual ‘‘Indicators’’ report. 
336 

The bill also updates the NSF Noyce Teacher Scholarship program, fellowship 

programs and cyber grant programs to include outreach to veterans. 

Additionally, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is tasked 

with overseeing an interagency working group to examine how to increase veteran 

participation in STEM career fields, including addressing any barriers for service 

members and their spouses. 

In the next five years, between one and 1.5 million members of the U.S. Armed 

Forces will leave the military, according to the Department of Defense. Many of 

these veterans will be seeking new careers; by a great margin, veterans cite finding 

employment as their number one need when returning home. 

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor and Statistics, occupations in STEM is projected to grow to more than 9 million between 2012 and 2022, an increase of about 

one million jobs. 

Research shows that many military veterans have skills and training that align 

with STEM careers, particularly in information technology (IT). However, research 

also shows veterans face many barriers as they re-enter the workforce, including a 

lack of formal STEM education, career guidance and the difficult task of transferring military credits to college credits. 

Our nation’s veterans deserve every opportunity to transition to a healthy and 

successful civilian life. This bill will help our service members to continue to serve 

our nation in new ways by filling 21st century jobs and keeping America on the cutting edge of innovation. 

I thank Mr. Takano, the Ranking Vice Chair of the Veterans Affairs Committee 

that we both have the privilege to serve on, for co-sponsoring this bipartisan legislation. And I salute my fellow veterans on the committee who joined my in introducing this bill. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your support as well. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Dunn. 

And the gentleman from California, Mr. Takano, is recognized. 

Mr. TAKANO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I am pleased to offer my support for the bill being marked up 

today, the Supporting Veterans STEM Careers Act. I’m proud to 

offer this legislation with my colleague Mr. Dunn. And as the Vice 

Ranking Member of the Veterans Affairs Committee, I have seen 

firsthand both the difficulties veterans face trying to further their 

education and the impact their experiences can have on a variety 

of civilian fields. 

I think everyone here agrees that we must find ways to improve 

higher education for veterans and the benefit veterans can have on 

the scientific and economic future of this country. 

Our bill directs the National Science Foundation to develop a 

plan to get more veterans into its STEM education and research 

programs. In addition, it requires NSF to report available data on 

veterans participating in STEM fields, both the research and careers. NSF will also be required to seek veterans out for existing 

NSF programs, including the Noyce Teacher Scholarship program, 

and for cybersecurity-specific education and training programs. 

This bill also creates an interagency committee to help veterans 

and their spouses transition into STEM careers, including annual 

reporting on their progress. 

For its part the NSF has been looking for ways to better integrate veterans into STEM fields, and I applaud their work. And I 

know all of us are looking forward to making more progress in this 

effort, and I think our bill is an important step forward. I think 

this is a great example of a win-win. We—when we empower veterans to succeed, everyone benefits. 

Thank you, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Takano. 
337 

And the Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from Texas, is recognized for her statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Chairman. 

I want to thank Mr. Dunn and Mr. Takano for introducing H.R. 

4323, the Supporting Veterans in STEM Careers Act. Veterans are an experienced group of dedicated individuals that 

far too long have remained a largely untapped source of talent in 

our Nation’s STEM work force. Projections from the Bureau of 

Labor Statistics predict that work force needs in STEM fields like 

computer science are outpacing our capacity to educate and train 

students in the field. H.R. 4323 is a step toward forestalling these 

projected gaps by leveraging a pool of skilled veterans to strengthen our STEM work force. 

I support this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it as well. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you, Chairman Smith. I want to thank Mr. Dunn and Mr. Takano for introducing H.R. 4323, the Supporting Veterans in STEM Careers Act. Veterans are an experienced group of dedicated individuals that for far too long 

have remained a largely untapped source of talent in our nation’s STEM workforce. 

Projections from the Bureau of Labor Statistics predict that workforce needs in 

STEM fields like computer science are outpacing our capacity to educate and train 

students in these fields. 

H.R. 4323 is a step toward forestalling these projected gaps by leveraging the pool 

of skilled veterans to strengthen our STEM workforce. 

I support this bill, and urge my colleagues to support it. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

And the gentleman from California, Mr. Rohrabacher, is recognized. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much. Just a few thoughts 

when we’re talking about this outreach to veterans that during the 

second world war—right now, we recognize the great contribution 

that Americans went overseas and fought for us, not just the contributions they made in the fighting but now it’s recognized that 

that greatest generation came home and built the American economy. America was never the same after World War II because we 

had millions of men and women who now were educated and— 

which we reached out to make sure they were educated when they 

came back—and playing a very vital role in our economy. That 

greatest generation—so we’re thankful to them not only for fighting 

the good fight overseas and protecting our country but for what 

they did to build our country afterwards. 

While we have been at war now for 16 years, we are at war. 

We’ve had people out and we still have to this day men and women 

out with their lives on the line and it’s disrupting their life and 

moving—and putting themselves at risk for us. They are making 

an enormous contribution like the World War II generation. Their 

contribution will be a great—even greater when they come home. 

I believe that there’s—that the veterans now, the millions—and 

I believe it’s probably about the same number of veterans, but we 

have 16 years where they’re spread out as the number of veterans 

we had in World War II. I think they have a major contribution 

to make to our country, and I really believe that what we’re doing 

in this type of thing at this type of outreach reflects what we did 
338 

with the World War II generation. I want to make sure those men 

and women coming back from overseas, and some of them disabled, 

that all of them have an opportunity to make their contribution 

now and live good and decent lives in an economy that will be as 

different 10 years from now as our economy was 10 years after the 

second world war. 

So with those—with that thought, I want to thank you for your 

leadership and the leadership of those in this Committee who are 

taking part in this debate but also thought out this idea of having 

the National Science Foundation outreach to those brave men and 

women who are coming home. Thank you very much. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher. 

If there’s no further discussion, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on—I’m sorry, the gentlewoman from Connecticut, Ms. Esty, is recognized. 

Ms. ESTY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

As a fellow Member of both this Committee and the Veterans Affairs Committee, I wanted to lend my support as well. 

We know that we need to do right by our veterans. Too many of 

our veterans are unemployed. They have a higher unemployment 

rate than civilians. That’s wrong and it’s shameful. We have a critical work force need in the STEM field and we have special skills 

that our veterans bring. Mr. Rohrabacher mentioned that, 

teambuilding skills, practical experience, and all of those we actually need and would benefit from. 

So I’m really delighted to join my fellow colleagues on both 

House Veterans Affairs and this Committee Mr. Takano and Mr. 

Dunn in supporting this legislation and encourage us to do right 

by our veterans and do right for our country. Thank you very 

much, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Esty. 

If there’s no further discussion, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 4323 to the House with the recommendation 

that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 4323 to the House. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

and H.R. 4323 is ordered reported to the House. 

And I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make 

any necessary technical and conforming changes. Without objection, so ordered. 

H.R. 4254 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 4254, 

the Women in Aerospace Education Act. And the clerk will report 

the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 4254, a bill to amend the National Science 

Foundation Authorization Act of 2002, to strengthen the aerospace 

work force pipeline by the promotion of Robert Noyce Teacher 

Scholarship program and National Aeronautics and Space Adminis-
339 

tration internship and fellowship opportunities to women, and for 

other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

And the gentleman from California, Mr. Knight, is recognized for 

an opening statement. 

Mr. KNIGHT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

This is an important initiative to strengthen our aerospace work 

force. H.R. 4253, the Women in Aerospace Education Act, directs 

the National Science Foundation, through the Robert Noyce Scholarship program and NASA to shape their fellowship and internship 

opportunities to encourage more women to get aerospace experience 

while they’re training to be teachers. 

Female aerospace professionals must be placed in the classroom 

at greater numbers. A full 1/5 of U.S. aerospace engineers are of 

retirement age today. They are beginning to exit our work force, 

which would create an enormous shortfall in our national security 

preparedness. 

Meanwhile, women represent only about 1/4 of all STEM workers 

and represent about 15 percent of all aerospace engineers. We need 

to improve our STEM education pipeline from ensuring STEM 

classes are available to students at a young age to encourage young 

Americans to pursue STEM education all the way through to the 

completion of their degree. But the gender gap that is so prevalent 

in this industry will persist until we make STEM and aerospace 

more inclusive of women and encourage women at a young age to 

pursue these fields. 

Attitudes about career paths are formed at a young age. The role 

models and leaders from which women learn have an enormous impact on future decisionmaking. I introduced the Women in Aerospace Education Act to make better use of some of the Federal Government’s best teacher training programs to increase the number 

of women teachers who have seen, worked on, and can relate the 

Nation’s leading aerospace programs to young female students. 

Robert Noyce scholars who get teacher certification assistance 

from the National Science Foundation are already in small numbers getting experience in NASA centers and the national labs. 

Once they become certified and go to teach in our K–12 system, 

they draw upon the work they have did—they did on major public 

initiatives in science and technology. Schools love having Noyce 

program teachers because their strong positive attitudes about 

STEM are cultivated in their students. It will strengthen our 

STEM pipeline to enhance the connection between the Noyce Scholarship program and our schools. 

The second provision of this bill directs NASA to more actively 

promote its internship and fellowship opportunities to women or 

members of other historically underrepresented groups. Together, 

the two provisions of this bill will help make a necessary and fundamental shift in our education system and aerospace work force 

pipeline that will prove critical to our national security in the long 

run. 

I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation. I’d like to 

thank Ms. Esty for her partnership on this bill, and I yield the remainder of my time. 
340 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. KNIGHT

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the time to speak in support of an important initiative to strengthening our aerospace workforce. 

H.R. 4253, the Women in Aerospace Education Act, directs the National Science 

Foundation, through the Robert Noyce Scholarship Program, and NASA to shape 

their fellowship and internship opportunities to encourage more women to get aerospace experience while they’re training to be teachers. 

Female aerospace professionals must be placed in the classroom in greater numbers. 

A full fifth of U.S. aerospace engineers are of retirement age today. They are beginning to exit our workforce, which will create an enormous shortfall in our national security preparedness. 

Meanwhile, women represent only about one-quarter of all STEM workers and 

represent about 15 percent of all aerospace engineers. 

We need to improve our STEM education pipeline, from ensuring STEM classes 

are available to students at a young age to encouraging young Americans pursue 

STEM education all the way through to the completion of their degree. 

But the gender gap that is so prevalent in this industry will persist until we make 

STEM and aerospace more inclusive of women and encourage women at a young age 

to pursue these fields. 

Attitudes about career paths are formed at a young age. 

The role models and leaders from which young women learn have an enormous 

impact on future decision-making. 

I introduced the Women in Aerospace Education Act to make better use of some 

of the federal government’s best teacher training programs to increase the number 

of women teachers who have seen, worked on and can relate the nation’s leading 

aerospace programs to young female students. 

Robert Noyce scholars, who get teacher certification assistance from the National 

Science Foundation, are already in small numbers getting experience in NASA Centers and the National Labs. 

Once they become certified and go to teach in our K-12 system, they draw upon 

the work they did on major public initiatives in science and technology. Schools love 

having Noyce program teachers because their strong positive attitudes about STEM 

are cultivated in their students. 

It will strengthen our STEM pipeline to enhance the connection between the 

Noyce scholarship program and our schools. 

The second provision of this bill directs NASA to more actively promote its internship and fellowship opportunities to women or members of other historically underrepresented groups. 

Together, the two provisions of this bill will help make a necessary and fundamental shift in our education system and aerospace workforce pipeline that will 

prove critical to our national security in the long run. 

I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation. I’d like to thank Ms. Esty 

for her help on this bill and I yield the remainder of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Knight. 

And the gentlewoman from Connecticut, Ms. Esty, is recognized 

for her statement. 

Ms. ESTY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m proud to be introducing 

this legislation with my colleague, Mr. Knight, and I want to thank 

him for his work on this. 

And, Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for cosponsoring this 

bill. And to my colleague Mrs. Comstock, we’ve worked together on 

these bills for number of years and it’s always great to see more 

good bipartisan work out of this Committee. 

One of our common goals on the Science Committee is to inspire 

more young people and particularly more young women to pursue 

careers in the sciences. And at this moment we have a long way 

to go in the aerospace field. We’re rapidly facing a critical shortage 

of skilled aerospace workers. According to a 2015 aviation week 

work force study, 28 percent of the aerospace work force is 56 years 

old or older, and nearly 1/5 of our aerospace engineers are now eli-
341 

gible for retirement, and we simply cannot fill those positions unless we broaden and deepen our pool of skilled workers. 

Moreover, women represent only about 1/4 of all STEM workers 

and represent only 15 percent of all aerospace engineers, and that’s 

why Representative Knight and I introduced the Women in Aerospace Education Act, to address both the critical work force needs 

and to bridge the gender gap in the aerospace industry. 

One of the key objectives of the Women in Aerospace Education 

Act is to equip more women with well-rounded working and learning experiences in aerospace engineering. Specifically, the Women 

in Aerospace Education Act would encourage universities applying 

for Noyce grants to incorporate aerospace working and learning experiences at the national laboratories and NASA centers for their 

fellowship programs. Robert Noyce Teaching Scholarship grants 

are used by universities to cover the cost of STEM-degree students 

who go on to teach in rural or lower-income school districts. 

Taking it a step further, our bill allows the National Science 

Foundation director to prioritize proposals for Noyce grants to provide female fellows with research experience in aerospace engineering. These teachers will then enter the classroom with firsthand 

knowledge of the impact aerospace programs have on our lives and 

share their passion and their inspiration with their students. It’s 

proven, as my colleague Mr. Knight mentioned, that girls who have 

women science teachers are more likely to get interested in science. 

Additionally, this bill directs NASA to prioritize the recruitment 

of women and minority candidates to apply for internships and fellowships at NASA. 

I recently had a chance to visit United Technology Corporation 

Aerospace Systems, UTAS, in Connecticut to learn more about the 

ways Connecticut companies like UTAS and Ensign-Bickford are 

supporting NASA’s deep space exploration missions. When I toured 

the facilities, I noticed that the engineers working on the critical 

Orion components there were virtually all men and virtually all in 

their late 40’s and 50’s. I met Erica Abrahamson, a young woman 

who is the Deputy Program Director for UTAS’s portion of the 

Orion deep space project, and she shared UTAS’s concerns about 

the aging work force. She and others at UTAS are looking down 

the line, and they know if they don’t diversify their work force, 

they’ll have a major shortage. 

And we will never be able to retain our competitive edge in 

science as a country or to meet critical STEM work force needs unless we bring more women to the table. In Congress, we recognize 

that need and we’re taking steps to address it. 

I want to thank my colleague, Congressman Knight, again for his 

leadership on this bill on this important issue. I urge my colleagues 

to support the Women in Aerospace Education Act, and I yield 

back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Esty. 

And the gentlewoman from Texas, the Ranking Member, is recognized for her statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to thank Mr. Knight and Ms. Esty for introducing H.R. 

4254, the Women in Aerospace Education Act. This year, we saw 

NASA Astronaut Peggy Whitson break the record for cumulative 
342 

time spent in space by a U.S. astronaut. Dr. Whitson is an inspiration for girls pursuing aerospace careers, but her success is not entirely shared by women throughout the aerospace sector. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that in 2016 women made up only 

8 percent of the aerospace engineers. H.R. 4254 will help address 

the underrepresentation of women in aerospace. 

I strongly support the passage of this bill, and I urge my colleagues to join me, as well as the rest of the Committee. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you, Chairman Smith. I want to thank Mr. Knight and Ms. Esty for introducing H.R. 4254, the Women in Aerospace Education Act. 

This year we saw NASA astronaut Peggy Whitson break the record for cumulative 

time spent in space by a U.S. astronaut. Dr. Whitson is an inspiration for girls pursuing aerospace careers, but her success is not widely shared by women throughout 

the aerospace sector. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that in 2016, women 

made up only 8 percent of aerospace engineers. H.R. 4254 will help address the 

underrepresentation of women in aerospace. 

I strongly support passage of this bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it as 

well. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

And the gentleman from California, Mr. Knight, is recognized for 

the purpose of offering an amendment. 

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 4254 offered by Mr. Knight of 

California, amendment number 037, page 2, line 3—— 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and Mr. Knight is recognized to explain his amendment. 

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Chairman, my amendment makes modifications 

in response to feedback from the National Science Foundation and 

the Committee. The amendment gives Noyce scholars who are undergraduates and Noyce fellows who are working to obtain their 

master’s degrees the opportunity to pursue research internships at 

NASA centers and national laboratories. These Noyce scholars and 

fellows who go on to become teachers can then take that experience 

back into the classroom and inspire students to go into aerospace 

jobs. 

I appreciate the National Science Foundation and the Committee 

working with us on this bill. I urge the adoption of this amendment 

and yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Knight. I recommend our colleagues here support the amendment as well. 

And is there anyone else who seeks to be recognized? 

If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment. 

All in favor, say aye. 

All opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

And if there are no further amendments, a reporting quorum 

being present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and 

Technology report H.R. 4254 to the House, as amended, with the 

recommendation that the bill be approved. 
343 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 4254 to the House, 

as amended. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

H.R. 4254 is ordered reported to the House. 

I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any 

necessary technical and conforming changes. And without objection, so ordered. 

H.R. 3397 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 3397, 

the Building Blocks of STEM Act. And the clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 3397, a bill to direct the National Science Foundation to support STEM education research focused on early childhood. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

And I’ll recognize the sponsor of the bill, Ms. Rosen, for her opening statement. 

Ms. ROSEN. Thank you, Chairman Smith and Ranking Member 

Johnson, for holding today’s markup on several STEM education 

bills, including one of mine, the Building Blocks of STEM Act. I 

also want to thank my colleague from across the aisle, Steve 

Knight, for collating this important legislation with me. 

STEM and computer science are central to our country’s innovation, economic growth, and employment. In my home State of Nevada and across the country we are continuing to see a huge demand for workers in the tech industry, including software developers, engineers, and computer programmers like me. According to 

the Bureau of Labor Statistics, STEM jobs are estimated to grow 

by 12 percent between now and 2024, faster than all other occupations. Despite these increasing opportunities in STEM careers, too 

few Americans possess the education and skills necessary to succeed. 

This disparity between computing and scientific talent and demand begins back in elementary school. Studies have found that 

children who engage in scientific activities from an early age develop positive attitudes toward science and are more likely to pursue STEM careers later on. In fact, interviews with current graduate students and scientists found that the majority of them reported that their interest in science began before middle school. 

The bill before us today, the Building Blocks of STEM Act, will 

ensure that we’re investing in our children as early as possible by 

directing National Science Foundation to equitably distribute funding across groups, including early childhood and its Discovery Research Pre-K–12 program. While this program seeks to enhance the 

learning and teaching of STEM, the majority of its current research 

focuses on students in middle school and older. My bill ensures 

that NSF focuses on engaging our Nation’s children in STEM education even younger. 

I’m also grateful that the manager’s amendment, introduced by 

Subcommittee Chairwoman Barbara Comstock, will incorporate 
344 

into this legislation another STEM bill of mine, the Code Like a 

Girl Act, which I introduced alongside Representative Elise 

Stefanik and of which Mrs. Comstock is a cosponsor. 

We all know the gender gap in STEM work force is widening, 

particularly in computer science where women hold only about 26 

percent of computing-relating—related occupations even though we 

make up more than half of the work force. This gender disparity 

extends down through all levels of education. In the last few years, 

approximately 23 percent of AP computer science exam takers were 

girls, and about only 18 percent of computer science bachelor’s degrees went to women. 

Gender stereotypes begin at a very early age. Studies have 

shown that around 6 years old girls develop the belief that brilliance is a male characteristic, and this negative stereotype is 

shown to have an immediate effect. The Code Like a Girl Act addresses this issue by creating NSF grants to increase understanding of the factors that contribute to the participation of young 

girls 10 and under in STEM and computer science activities, and 

this bill also creates a grant program to develop and evaluate interventions in pre-K and elementary school classrooms that seek to increase participation of young girls in computer science. 

By increasing the number of women in computer science careers, 

we diversify the qualified pool that the United States relies on for 

innovation. This will help us maintain our global competitiveness 

and expand our economy. So we shouldn’t deprive our country of 

talented minds that could be working on our Nation’s most challenging problems, talented young minds that could be inventing the 

next breakthrough technology, founding future startups, and keeping our Nation safe from cyber attacks. So for those reasons I am 

proud that my Code Like a Girl Act is being included in the Building Blocks of STEM Act and that we are one step closer to bridging 

our current gaps in STEM education and work force training. I 

urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back my 

time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Rosen. 

And the gentleman from California, Mr. Knight, is recognized. 

Mr. KNIGHT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I speak in support of H.R. 3397, a bipartisan bill that I am proud 

to sponsor with Ms. Jacky Rosen. Investing in our children and 

their future is always an opportunity for good. Expanding the reach 

of our STEM education programs to children of all ages will create 

a greater future in innovation. Research shows that children at a 

very young age are capable of absorbing STEM concepts, and any 

parent can tell you that shortly after kids learn to talk, the questions can be endless. Children have a natural curiosity that can be 

fostered into an interest in science, technology, engineering, math, 

and computer science. 

The bill directs NSF to more equitably allocate funding for research and studies that focus on early childhood, investing in children early, ensuring we are laying the groundwork to develop 

young innovators in STEM. 

I want to thank Ms. Rosen for her work on this bill and thank 

the Chairman for his support, and I yield back the balance of my 

time. 
345 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Knight. 

And the gentlewoman from Texas, the Ranking Member, is recognized for her statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Chairman Smith. I want to 

thank Ms. Rosen and Mrs. Comstock for introducing 37—3397, the 

Building Blocks of STEM Act. Ms. Rosen has been a champion for 

increasing the participation of girls in computer science since she 

joined the Science Committee, and I commend her for her efforts. 

A research article published in the journal Science earlier this 

year revealed that girls begin to view intelligence as a male trait 

as early as 6 years old. This attitude has a profound impact on 

educational and career choices made by young women. H.R. 3397 

directs the National Science Foundation to support research into 

factors that contribute to the early adoption of these stereotypes 

and scalable models for intervention to prevent or reverse the effects of these negative and erroneous stereotypes. This legislation 

is good for this Nation. I strongly support this bill and urge my colleagues to support it as well. 

I thank you and yield back the balance of my time. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you, Chairman Smith. I want to thank Ms. Rosen and Ms. Comstock for 

introducing H.R. 3397, the Building Blocks of STEM Act. Ms. Rosen has been a 

champion for increasing the participation of girls in computer science since she 

joined the Science Committee, and I commend her for her efforts. A research article 

published in the journal Science earlier this year revealed that girls begin to view 

intelligence as a male trait as early as 6 years old. This attitude has a profound 

impact on educational and career choices made by young women. 

H.R. 3397 directs NSF to support research into factors that contribute to the early 

adoption of these stereotypes and scalable models for intervention to prevent or reverse the effects of these negative and erroneous stereotypes. 

I strongly support this bill and urge my colleagues to support it. 

I yield back the balance of my time 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

We have an amendment in the nature of a substitute to be offered by Mrs. Comstock, and she is recognized for that purpose. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 3387 offered by Mrs. Comstock 

of Virginia, amendment number 001. Strike all after the enacting 

clause and insert the following. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman from Virginia is—continues 

to be recognized. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. This amendment adds two provisions to the 

Building Blocks of STEM Act. The first is a section on supporting 

girls in STEM education and computer science based on legislation 

that I cosponsored with Mrs. Rosen earlier this year, as was mentioned. The provision directs the National Science Foundation to research the role of teachers and other mentors in girls’ perception 

of and participation in science. 

I have seen firsthand the important role that mentors can play 

in helping inspire young women through my own Young Women’s 

Leadership Program that I run in my district in the summer and 

is important to learn how that impacts girls long-term in STEM. 
346 

I was also pleased to be able to participate recently in a coding 

program in a disadvantaged school in my district, and you’ll be 

happy to know that the kindergartners were doing coding. They 

had a great little program that they had and these—and the girls 

were in there and it’s exactly—it’s coding like a girl right from kindergarten. It was really exciting to see that. 

The provision also directs NSF to develop scalable models to increase young girls’ participation. Although women fill close to half 

of all jobs in the U.S. economy, they hold less than 25 percent of 

all STEM jobs, so this obviously can start changing this from kindergarten or even before. 

Finally, the amendment includes a provision to add informatics 

and computer science to the definition of STEM in the Noyce 

Teacher program. Informatics, the science of processing data for 

storage and retrieval, is one of the fastest-growing STEM career 

fields. The Bureau of Labor Statistics projects the number of health 

informatics specialists to grow 15 percent by 2024, which is faster 

than the projected job growth of all other U.S. professions. We need 

teachers trained to understand this growing field and to develop 

the next generation of workers. 

Thank you, Mrs. Rosen, for working with us to come to agreement on this language. Together, these provisions will provide 

many building blocks for STEM, and I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. And I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mrs. Comstock. 

And is there any further discussion on the amendment? 

If not, the question is on agreeing to the manager’s amendment. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Those opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

If there are no further amendments, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 3397 to the House, as amended, with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 3397 to the House, 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

It’s getting weaker and weaker as we go along. 

All opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

H.R. 3397 is ordered reported to the House. 

I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any 

necessary technical and conforming changes. Without objection, so 

ordered. 

Before we adjourn, I just want to thank all the Members who 

have been here today and hesitate to single out any particular 

group, but I will say we had almost full attendance looking to my 

left today, and that was very much appreciated. And we still have 

a number of people here as well. Looking to my right, we have the 

author of the bill and two Texans, which is always a good combination to have. 

Ms. JOHNSON. They’re back in the cloakroom. 
347 

Chairman SMITH. Well, they’re back in the cloakroom Ms. Johnson says. 

If there’s no further discussion, that completes our business. This 

concludes the markup today. Without objection, we stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:21 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(349) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 4376, H.R. 4377, H.R. 4378, H.R. 4375, H.R. 4323, H.R. 4254, 

AMENDMENT ROSTER, H.R. 3397, AMENDMENT ROSTER
350 

G:\M\15\KNIGH1\KNIGHT_036.XML 

115TH CONGRESS H R 

1ST SESSION • • 

(Original Signature of Member) 

To direct the Secretary of Energy to carry out certain upgrades to research 

equipment and the construction of a research user facility, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

Mr. K..'IIGIIT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on------------

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Energy to carry out certain upgrades to research equipment and the construction of 

a research user facility, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives ofth£ United States of Amm·ica in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Department of Energy 

5 Research Infrastructure Act of 2017". 

6 SEC. 2. ADVANCED LIGHT SOURCE UPGRADE. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary of Energy shall 

8 provide for the upgrade to the Advanced Light Source deg:IVHLC\11 0917\110917.139.xml 

November 9, 2017 (1 :22 p.m.) 

(67989617) 
351 

G:\M\15\KNIGH1\KNIGHT_036.XML 

2 

scribed in the publication approved by the Basic Energy 

2 Sciences Advisory Committee on June 9, 2016, titled "Re3 port on Facility Upgrades", including the development of 

4 a multi-bend achromat lattice to produce a high flux of 

5 coherent x-rays within the soft x-ray energy region. 

6 (b) DEFINITIONS.-ln this section: 

7 (1) Fr,ux.-The term "flux" means the rate of 

8 flow of photons. 

9 (2) SOFT X-RAY.-The term "soft x-ray" means 

10 a photon with energy in the range from 50 to 2,000 

11 electron volts. 

12 (c) START OF OPERATIONS.-The Secretary shall, to 

13 the maximum extent practicable, ensure that the start of 

14 full operations of the upgrade under this section occurs 

15 before December 31, 2026. 

16 (d) .B'UNDING.-Out of funds appropriated to the Of17 fice of Science, there shall be made available to the Sec18 retary to carry out the upgrade under this section19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\11 0917111 0917.139.xml 

November 9, 2017 (1 :22 p.m.) 

(1) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

(2) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2019; 

(3) $80,000,000 for fiscal year 2020; 

(4) $80,000,000 for fiscal year 2021; 

(5) $52,000,000 for fiscal year 2022; 

(6) $22,000,000 for fiscal year 2023; and 

(7) $6,000,000 for fiscal year 2024. 

(67989617) 
352 

G:\M\15\KNIGH1\KNIGHT_036.XML 

3 

1 SEC. 3. LINAC COHERENT LIGHT SOURCE II HIGH ENERGY 

2 UPGRADE. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary of Energy shall 

4 provide for the upgrade to the Linac Coherent Light 

5 Source II facility described in the publication approved by 

6 the Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee on June 

7 9, 2016, titled "Report on Facility Upgrades", ineluding 

8 the development of experimental capabilities for high en9 ergy x-rays to reveal fundamental scientific discoveries. 

10 The Secretary shall ensure the upgrade under this section 

11 enables the production and use of high energy, ultra-short 

12 pulse x-rays delivered at a high repetition rate. 

13 (b) DEF'INITIONS.-In this section: 

14 (1) HIGH ENERGY X-RAY.-The term a "high 

15 energy x-ray" means a photon with an energy at or 

16 exceeding 12 kiloelectron volts. 

17 (2) HIGH REPETITION RA'l'E.-The term "high 

18 repetition rate" means the delivery of x-ray pulses 

19 up to one million pulses per second. 

20 (3) ULTRA-SHORT PULSE X-RAYS.-The term 

21 "ultra-short pulse x-rays" means x-ray bursts capa22 ble of durations of less than one hundred 

23 femtoseconds. 

24 (c) START OF OPERATIOJ'\S.-The Secretary shall, to 

25 the maximum extent practicable, ensure that the start of 

g:\VHLC\11 09171110917.139.xml 

November 9, 2017 (1 :22 p.m.) 

(67989617) 
353 

G:\M\15\KNIGH1\KNIGHT _036.XML 

4 

full operations of the upgrade under this section occurs 

2 before December 31, 2025. 

3 (d) FUNDING.-Out of funds appropriated to the Of4 fice of Science, there shall be made available to the SeeS retary to carry out the upgrade under this section6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

(1) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

(2) $55,000,000 for fiscal year 2019; 

(3) $80,000,000 for fiscal year 2020; 

(4) $80,000,000 for fiscal year 2021; 

(5) $54,000,000 for fiscal year 2022; and 

(6) $31,000,000 for fiscal year 2023. 

12 SEC. 4. FACILITY FOR RARE ISOTOPE BEAMS. 

13 (a) IN GENERAJ..-The Secretary of Energy shall 

14 provide for a Facility for Rare Isotope Beams to advance 

15 the understanding of rare nuclear isotopes and the evo16 lution of the cosmos. 

17 (b) FACILITY 0APABILITY.-In carrying out sub18 section (a), the Secretary shall provide for, at a minimum, 

19 a rare isotope beam facility capable of 400 kW of beam 

20 power. 

21 (c) START OI<' OPERATIONS.-The Secretary shall, to 

22 the maximum extent practicable, ensure that the start of 

23 full operations of the facility under this section occurs be24 fore June 30, 2022, with early operation in 2018. 

g:\VHLC\110917111 0917.139.xml 

November 9, 2017 (1:22 p.m.) 

(87989617) 
354 

G:\M\15\KNIGH1\KNIGHT_036.XML 

5 

1 (d) FUNDING.-Out of funds appropriated to the Of2 fice of Science, there shall be made available to the Sec3 retary to carry out activities, including construction of the 

4 facility, under this section5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

g:\VHLC\11 09171110917.139.xml 

November 9, 2017 (1 :22 p.m.) 

(1) $101,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

(2) $103,000,000 for fiscal year 2019; 

(3) $104,000,000 for fiscal year 2020; 

(4) $105,000,000 for fiscal year 2021; and 

(5) $106,000,000 for fiscal year 2022. 

(67989617) 
355 

G:\M\!5\HULTGR\HULTGR_025.XML 

I 15TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION 

(Original Signature of Member) 

H.R. 

To direct the Secretary of Energy to carry out an upgrade to research 

equipment and constrnet research user facilities, and for otlwr purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

Mr. HULTGREN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on·----------~---

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Energy to carry out an upgrade 

to research equipment and construct research user facilities, and for other purposes. 

1 Be # enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress nssembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Accelerating American 

5 Leadership in Science Act of 2017". 

6 SEC. 2. ADVANCED PHOTON SOURCE UPGRADE. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary of Energy shall 

8 provide for the upgrade to the Advanced Photon Source 

g:\VHLC\11 0917\11 0917.069.xml 

November 9, 2017 (11:34 a.m.) 

(67989719) 
356 

G:\M\15\HULTGR\HULTGR_025.XML 

2 

1 described in the publication approved by the Basic Energy 

2 Sciences Advisory Committee on June 9, 2016, titled "Re3 port on Facility Upgrades", including the development of 

4 a multi-bend achromat lattice to produce a high flux of 

5 coherent x-rays within the hard x-ray energy region and 

6 a suite of beamlines optimized for this source. 

7 (b) DEI<'INITIONS.-ln this section: 

8 (1) FLUX.-The term "flux" means the rate of 

9 flow of photons. 

10 (2) HARD X-RAY.-The term "hard x-ray'' 

11 means a photon with energy greater than 20 

12 kiloelectron volts. 

13 (c) START OF OPERATIONS.-The Secretary shall, to 

14 the maximum extent practicable, ensure that the start of 

15 full operations of the upgrade under this section occurs 

16 before December 31, 2025. 

17 (d) FUNDING.-Out of funds appropriated to the Of18 fice of Science, there shall be made available to the Sec19 retary to carry out the upgrade under this section20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\110917\ 110917.069.xinl 

November 9, 2017 (11 :34 a.m.) 

(1) $93,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

(2) $130,000,000 for fiscal year 2019; 

(3) $152,400,000 for fiscal year 2020; 

( 4) $150,000,000 for fiscal year 2021; 

(5) $73,600,000 for fiscal year 2022; and 

(6) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2023. 

(67989719} 
357 

G:\M\15\HUL TGR\HULTGR_025.XML 

3 

SEC. 3. LONG-BASELINE NEUTRINO FACILITY FOR DEEP 

2 UNDERGROUND NEUTRINO EXPERIMENT. 

3 (a) IN GENBRAh-The Secretary of Energy shall 

4 provide for a Long-Baseline Neutrino Facility to facilitate 

5 the international Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment 

6 to enable a program in neutrino physics to measure the 

7 fundamental properties of neutrinos, explore physics be8 yond the Standard Model, and better clarify the nature 

9 of matter and antimatter. 

10 (b) FACILITY CAPABILITIES.-The Secretary shall 

11 ensure that the facility described in subsection (a) will pro12 \ride, at a minimum, the following capabilities: 

13 (1) A broad-band neutrino beam capable of 1.2 

14 megawatts (.MW) of beam power and upgradable to 

15 2.4 1\'l:W of beam power. 

16 (2) Four caverns excavated for a forty kiloton 

17 fiducial detector mass and supporting surface build18 ings and utilities. 

19 (3) Neutrino detector facilities at both the Far 

20 Site in South Dakota and the Near Site in lllinois 

21 to categorize and study neutrinos on their 800-milc 

22 journey between the two sites. 

23 ( 4) Cryog·enic systems to support neutrino de24 tectors. 

25 (c) START OF OPER.ATIONS.-The Secretary shall, to 

26 the maximum extent practicable, ensure that the start of 

g:\VHLC\11 0917111 0917.069.xml 

November 9, 2017 (11:34 a.m.) 

(67989719) 
358 

G:\M\15\HUL TGR\HUL TGR_025.XML 

4 

1 full operations of the facility under this section occurs be2 fore December 31, 2026. 

3 (d) FUNDING.-Out of funds appropriated to the Of4 fice of Science, there shall be made available to the Sec5 retary to carry out activities, including construction of the 

6 facility, under this section7 (1) $95,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

8 (2) $160,000,000 for fiscal year 2019; 

9 (3) $195,000,000 for fiscal year 2020; 

10 ( 4) $195,000,000 for fiscal year 2021; 

11 (5) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2022; 

12 (6) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2023; 

13 (7) $195,000,000 for fiscal year 2024; 

14 (8) $150,000,000 for fiscal year 2025; and 

15 (9) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2026. 

16 SEC. 4. SPALLATION NEUTRON SOURCE PROTON POWER 

17 UPGRADE. 

18 (a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary of Energy shall 

19 provide for a proton power upgrade to the Spallation Neu20 tron Source. 

21 (b) DEFINITION OF PROTON POWER UPGRADE.-

22 For the purposes of this section, the term "proton power 

23 upgrade" means the Spallation Neutron Source power up24 grade described ing:\VHLC\110917111 0917.069.xml 

November 9. 2017 (11:34 a.m.) 

(67989719) 
359 

G:\M\15\HULTGRIHULTGR_025.XML 

5 

1 (1) the publication of the Office of Science of 

2 the Department of Energy titled "Facilities for the 

3 Future of Science: A Twenty-year Outlook", pub4 lished December 2003; 

5 (2) the publication of the Office of Science of 

6 the Department of Energy titled "Four Years r~ater: 

7 An Interim Report on Facilities for the Future of 

8 Science: A Twenty-Year Outlook", published August 

9 2007; and 

10 ( 3) the publication approved by the Basic En11 ergy Sciences Advisory Committee on June 9, 2016, 

12 titled "Report on Facility upgrades". 

13 (c) START OF OPERATIO~s.-The Secretary shall, to 

14 the maximum extent practicable, ensure that the start of 

15 full operations of the upgrade under this section occurs 

16 before December 31, 2025. 

17 (d) FUNDING.-Out of funds appropriated to the Of18 fice of Science, there shall be made available to the Sec19 retary to carry out the upgrade under this section20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\110917\11 0917.069.xml 

November 9, 2017 (11 :34 a.m.) 

(1) $26,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

(2) $70,800,000 for fiscal year 2019; 

(3) $33,500,000 for fiscal year 2020; 

( 4) $40,500,000 for fiscal year 2021; 

(5) $21,100,000 for fiscal year 2022; 

(6) $13,200,000 for fiscal year 2023; and 

(67989719) 
360 

G:\M\15\HULTGR\HULTGR_025.XML 

6 

(7) $2,900,000 for fiscal year 2024. 

2 SEC. 5. SPALLATION NEUTRON SOURCE SECOND TARGET 

3 STATION. 

4 (a) IN GENER.<\L.-The Secretary of Energy shall 

5 provide for a second target station for the Spallation Neu6 tron Source. 

7 (b) DEFINITION OF SECOND TARGET STATION.-For 

8 the purposes of this section, the term "second target sta9 tion" means the Spallation Neutron Source second target 

10 station described in11 (1) the publication of the Office of Science of 

12 the Department of Energy titled "Facilities for the 

13 Future of Science: A Twenty-year Outlook", pub14 lished December 2003; 

15 (2) the publication of the Office of Science of 

16 the Department of Energy titled "Four Years Later: 

17 An Interim Report on F'acilities for the Future of 

18 Science: A Twenty-Year Outlook", published August 

19 2007; and 

20 (3) the publication approved by the Basic En21 ergy Sciences Advisory Committee on ,June 9, 2016, 

22 titled "Report on Facility Upgrades". 

23 (c) START OF OPERATIONS.-The Secretary shall, to 

24 the maximum extent practicable, ensure that the start of 

25 full operations of the second target station under this secg:\VHLC\11 0917111 0917.069.xml 

November 9, 2017 (11:34 a.m.) 

(67989719) 
361 

G:\M\15\HULTGRIHUL TGR_025.XML 

7 

tion occurs before December 31, 2030, with the option for 

2 early operation in 2028. 

3 (d) FmmiNG.-Out of funds appropriated to the Of4 fiee of Seienee, there shall be made available to the See5 retary to earry out activities, in eluding construction, under 

6 this section7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

g:\VHLC\11 0917\11 0917.069.xml 

November 9, 2017 (11 :34 a.m.) 

(1) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

(2) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2019; 

(3) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2020; 

(4) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2021; 

(5) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2022; 

(6) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2023; 

(7) $275,000,000 for fiscal year 2024; 

(8) $275,000,000 for fiscal year 2025; 

(9) $275,000,000 for fiscal year 2026; 

(10) $250,000,000 for fiscal year 2027; and 

(11) $120,000,000 for fiscal year 2028. 

(67989719) 
362 

G:\M\15\WEBER\WEBER_OIZ.XML 

115TH CONGRESS H R 

1ST SESSION 

• • 

(Original Signature of Member) 

To direct the Secretary of Energy to carry out the construction of a yersatile 

reactor-based fast neutron source, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF HEPRESENTATIVES 

Mr. WEBER of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Energy to carry out the construction of a versatile reactor-based fast neutron source, 

and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep1·esenta2 tives of the United States of AmeTica in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Nuclear Energy Re5 search Infrastructure Act of 2017". 

6 SEC. 2. VERSATILE NEUTRON SOURCE. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary of Energy shall 

8 provide for a versatile reactor-based fast neutron source, 

g:\VHLC\11 0817111 0817.252.xml 

November a. 2017 (5:27 p.m.) 

(67989814) 
363 

G:\M\15\WEBER\WEBER_012.XML 

2 

which shall operate as a national user facility. The Sec2 retary shall consult with the private sector, universities, 

3 National Laboratories, and relevant Federal agencies to 

4 ensure that the versatile neutron source is capable of 

5 meeting Federal research needs for neutron irradiation 

6 serviCes. 

7 (b) FACII,ITY CAPABII,ITIES.-

8 (1) CAPABIIXl'IES.-The Secretary shall ensure 

9 that the facility described in subsection (a) will pro1 0 vide, at a minimum, the following capabilities: 

11 (A) Fast neutron spectrum irradiation ca12 pability. 

13. (B) Capacity for upgrades to accommodate 

14 new or expanded research needs. 

15 (2) CONSIDERA'l'IONS.-In carrying out para16 graph {1), the Secretary shall consider the following: 

17 (A) Capabilities that support exl)erimental 

18 high-temperature testing. 

19 (B) Providing a source of fast neutrons at 

20 a neutron flux higher than that at which exist21 ing research facilities operate, sufficient to en22 able research for an optimal base of prospective 

23 users. 

g:\VHLC\11 OB17\110B17.252.xml 

November B, 2017 (5:27p.m.) 

(67989814) 
364 

G:\M\15\WEBER\WEBER_Ol2.XML 

3 

1 (C) :Maximizing irradiation flexibility and 

2 irradiation volume to accommodate as many 

3 concurrent users as possible. 

4 (D) Capabilities for irradiation with neu5 trons of a lower energy spectrum. 

6 (E) Multiple loops for fuels and materials 

7 testing of different coolants. 

8 (F) Capabilities that support irradiating 

9 and processing targets for isotope production. 

10 (G) Additional pre-irradiation and post-ir11 radiation examination capabilities. 

12 (H) Lifetime operating costs and lifecycle 

13 costs. 

14 (c) START 01<' 0PERATIONS.-The Secretary shall, to 

15 the ma.ximum extent practicable, ensure that the start of 

16 full operations of the facility under this section occurs be17 fore December 31, 2025. 

18 (d) FTTNDING.-Out of funds appropriated to the Of19 fice of Nuclear Energy, there shall be made available to 

20 the Secretary to carry out activities, including design and 

21 construction of the facility, under this section22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\110817\110817.252.xml 

November 8, 2017 (5:27p.m.) 

(1) $35,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

(2) $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2019; 

(3) $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2020; 

( 4) $260,000,000 for fiscal year 2021; 

(67989814) 
365 

G:\M\15\WEBER\WEBER_OIZ.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

g:IVHLC\1108171110817.252.xml 

November 8, 2017 (5:27p.m.) 

4 

(5) $340,000,000 for fiscal year 2022; 

(6) $350,000,000 for fiscal year 2023; 

(7) $350,000,000 for fiscal year 2024; and 

(8) $350,000,000 for fiscal year 2025. 

(67989814) 
366 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\STEM_003.XML 

(Original Signature of Member) 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H.R. 

To provide for a study on broadening participation in certain National Science 

Foundation research and education programs, to collect data on Federal 

research grants to science agencies, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE O.F' REPRESENTATIVES 

~[rs. COMSTOCK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on ___________ _ 

A BILL 

To provide for a study on broadening participation in certain 

National Science Foundation research and education programs, to collect data on J<'ederal research grants to 

science agencies, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 'l'his Act may be cited as the "STEM Research and 

5 Education Effectiveness and Transparency Act". 

g:\VHLC\11 0917\1 1 0917.009.xml 

November 9, 2017 (9:39a.m.) 

(68016215) 
367 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\STEM_003.XML 

2 

1 SEC. 2. BROADENING PARTICIPATION IN STEM PROGRAM 

2 EFFECTIVENESS STUDY. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 12 months after 

4 the date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the Na5 tiona! Science Foundation shall submit a report to Con6 gress on the effectiveness of all National Science Founda7 tion research and education programs for broadening the 

8 participation of women and other historically underrep9 resented individuals in STEM studies and careers, includ10 ing11 (1) development or identification of perform12 ancc metrics to evaluate such programs; 

13 (2) information on student outcomes using all 

14 available data, including dropout rates, enrollment in 

15 graduate programs, internships or apprenticeships, 

16 and employment; 

17 (3) identification of any data gaps for evalu18 ating the effectiveness and outcomes of National 

19 Science Foundation programs to broaden participa20 tion; and 

21 ( 4) recommendations for maintaining, trans22 lating, and disseminating outcomes data for STEM 

23 programs funded by the National Science Founda24 tion. 

25 (c) DEFINITION OF STEM.-In this section, the term 

26 "STEM" has the meaning given the term in section 2 of 

g:\VHLC\110917\110917.009.xml 

November 9, 2017 (9:39a.m.) 

(68016215) 
368 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\STEM_003.XML 

3 

the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 

2 (42 U.S.C. 6621 note). 

3 SEC. 3. COLLECTION AND REPORTING OF DATA ON FED· 

4 ERAL RESEARCH GRANTS. 

5 (a) COLLECTION 0.1<' DATA.-

6 (1) IN GENERAh-Each Federal science agency 

7 shall collect standardized record-level annual infor8 mation on demographics, primary field, award type, 

9 review rating, budget request, funding outcome, and 

10 awarded budget for all applications for merit-re11 viewed research and development grants to institu12 tions of higher education and Federal laboratories 

13 supported by that agency. 

14 (2) UNIFORMITY Al'\'D ST.A..'\DARDIZATION.-The 

15 Director shall establish a policy to ensure uniformity 

16 and standardization of the data collection required 

17 under paragTaph ( 1). 

18 (3) RECORD-LE\'EL DATA.-

19 (A) REQUIREMENT.-On an annual basis, 

20 beginning with the deadline under subpara21 graph (C), each Federal science agency shall 

22 submit to the Director of the National Science 

23 Foundation record-level data collected under 

24 paragTaph (1) in the form required by such Di25 rector. 

g:\VHLC\1109171110917.009.xml 

November 9, 2017 (9:39a.m.) 

(68016215) 
369 

G:\CMTE\Sal5\SCIENCE\STEM_003.XML 

4 

(B) PREVIOUS DATA.-As part of the first 

2 submission under subparagraph (A), each Fed3 eral science agency, to the extent practicable, 

4 shall submit comparable record-level data for 

5 the 5 years preceding the deadline under sub6 paragraph (C). 

7 (C) DEADI,INE.-The deadline under this 

8 paragraph is not later than 1 year after the 

9 date of enactment of this Act. 

10 (b) REPORTING OF DATA.-The Director of the Na11 tional Science Foundation shall publish statistical sum12 mary data collected under this section, disaggregated and 

13 cross-tabulated demographically and by years since com14 pletion of doctoral degree, including in conjunction with 

15 the National Science Foundation's report required by sec16 tion 37 of the Science and Technolob'Y Equal Opportuni17 ties Act ( 42 U.S.C. 1885d; Public Law 96-516). 

18 (c) DEFINITIONS.-ln this section: 

19 (1) DIRECTOR-The term "Director" means 

20 the Director of the Office of Science and Technology 

21 Policy. 

22 (2) FEDERAL LABORATORY.-The term "Fed23 eral laboratory" has the meaning given that term in 

24 section 4 of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Inno25 vation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3703). 

g:\VHLC\ 11 0917111 0917.009.xml 

November 9, 2017 (9:39 a.m.) 

(68016215) 
370 

G:\CMTE\SC\IS\SCIENCE\STEM_003.XML 

5 

(3) FEDERAl, SCIENCE AGENCY.-The term 

2 "Federal science agency" means any Federal agency 

3 with at least $100,000,000 in research and develop4 ment expenditures in fiscal year 2017. 

5 (4) INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.-The 

6 term "institution of higher education" has the 

7 meaning given such term in section 101 (a) of the 

8 Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)). 

g:\VHLC\11 0917\11 0917.009.xml 

November 9, 2017 (9:39a.m.) 

(68016215) 
371 

G:\CMTEISal5\SCIENCE\STB."f_002.XML 

(Original Signature of Member) 

115TH 1ST CONGRESS SESSION H R L/3~3 . 

• • 

To promote veteran involvement in STEM education, computer science, and 

scientific research, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

Mr. DUNN (for himself and Mr. T.AKANO) introduced the following bill; whicl! 

was referred to the Committee on-~---------

A BILL 

To promote veteran involvement in STEM education, computer science, and scientific research, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Reyrresenta2 tives of the United States of America in C011gress assemhled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Supporting Veterans 

5 in STEM Careers Act". 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

7 In this Act: 

g:\VHLC\110817\110817.214.xml 

November B, 2017 (4:33 p.m.) 

(68013912) 
372 

G:\CM1E\SC\15\SCIENCE\STEM,_002.XML 

2 

1 (1) DIRECTOR-The term "Director" means 

2 the Director of the National Science Foundation. 

3 (2) FOUNDATION.-The term "Foundation" 

4 means the National Science Foundation. 

5 (3) STEM.-The term "STE:M" has the mcan6 ing given the term in section 2 of the America COM7 PETES Heauthorization Act of 2010 ( 42 U.S.C. 

8 6621 note). 

9 (4) VETERAN.-The term "veteran" has the 

10 meaning given the term in section 101 of title 38, 

11 United States Code. 

12 SEC. 3. SUPPORTING VETERANS IN STEM EDUCATION AND 

13 COMPUTER SCIENCE. 

14 (a) SUPPORTING VETERAN INVOLVEMENT IN SCI15 ENTIFIC RESEARCH AND STEM EDUCATION.-The Di16 rector shall, through the research and education activities 

17 of the Foundation, encourage veterans to study and pur18 sue careers in STEM and computer science, in coordina19 tion with other Federal agencies that serve veterans. 

20 (b) VETERAN 0UTRF..ACH PLAN.-Not later than 90 

21 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Director 

22 shall submit to the Committee on Science, Space, and 

23 Technology of the House of Representatives and the Com24 mittee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 

g:\VHLC\1 10B17\110B17.214.xml 

NovemberS, 2017 (4:33p.m.) 

(68013912) 
373 

G:\CMTE\Sai5\'lCIBNCE\'>TEM_002.XML 

3 

1 Senate a plan for how the Foundation can enhance its out2 reach efforts to veterans. Such plan shall3 (1) report on the Fotmdation's existing out4 reach activities; 

5 (2) identify the best method for the Foundation 

6 to leverage existing authorities and programs to fa7 cilitate and support veterans in STEM careers and 

8 studies, including teaching programs; and 

9 (3) identify a method for the Foundation to 

10 track veteran participation in research and edu11 cation programs of the Foundation, and describe 

12 any barriers to collecting such information. 

13 (c) NATIONAL SCIENCE BOARD INDICATORS RE14 PORT.-The National Science Board shall provide in its 

15 annual report on indicators of the state of science and en16 gineering in the United States any available and relevant 

17 data on veterans in science and engineering careers or 

18 education programs. 

19 (d) ROBERT NOYCE TEACHER ScHOLARSHIP PRo20 GRAM UPDATE.-Section 10 of the National Science 

21 Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 1862n22 1) is amended23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\11 0817\110817.214.xml 

November a, 2017 (4:33p.m.) 

(1) in subsection (a)(5)-

(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking 

"and" at the end; 

(68013912) 
374 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SC1ENCIMTEM_002.XML 

4 

1 (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking the 

2 period and inserting"; and"; and 

3 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

4 "(C) higher education programs that serve 

5 or support veterans."; 

6 (2) in subsection (b)(2)(F)-

7 (A) by striking "and students" and insert8 ing ", students"; and 

9 (B) by inserting ", and veterans" before 

10 the period at the end; 

11 (3) in subsection (c)(2), by inserting "and vet12 erans" before the period at the end; and 

13 (4) in subsection (d)(2), by inserting "and vet14 erans" before the period at the end. 

15 (e) NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION TEACHING 

16 FELLOWSHIPS AND lVIASTER TEACHING FELLOWSIDPS 

17 UPDATE.-Section lOA(d) of the National Science Foun18 dation Authorization Act of 2002 ( 42 U.S.C. 1862n19 la(d)) is amended20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:\VHLC\110917\110917 .214.xml 

November B, 2017 (4:33p.m.) 

(1) in paragraph (3)(F)-

(A) by striking "and individuals" and inserting ", individuals"; and 

(B) by inserting ", and veterans" before 

the period at the end; and 

(69013912) 
375 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\STEM_002.XML 

5 

1 (2) in paragraph (4)(B), by inserting "and vet2 erans" before the period at the end. 

3 (f) NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDA'l'ION COMPUTER 

4 .AND NETWORK SECURITY CAPACITY BUILDING GR.AJ.'lTS 

5 UPDATE.-Section 5(a) of the Cyber Security Research 

6 and Development Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 7404(a)) is 

7 a.nlended8 (1) in paragraph (1), by inserting "and stu9 dents who are veterans" after "these fields"; and 

10 (2) in paragraph (3)-

11 (A) in subparagraph (I), by striking "and" 

12 at the end; 

13 (B) by redesignating subparagraph (J) as 

14 subparagraph (K); and 

15 (C) by inserting after subparagraph (I) the 

16 following: 

17 "(J) creating opportunities for veterans to 

18 transition to careers in computer and network 

19 security; and". 

20 (g) GRADUATE TRAINEESHIPS IN COMPUTER AND 

21 NETWORK SECURITY RESEARCH UPDATE.-Section 

22 5(c)(6)(0) of the Cyber Security Research and Develop23 ment Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 7404(c)(6)(0)) is amended 

24 by inserting "or veterans," after "disciplines". 

g:\VHLC\1 i-0817\1108i7.214.xml 

November 8, 2017 (4:33p.m.) 

{68013912) 
376 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\STEM_002.xML 

6 

1 (h) VETERANS AND MILITARY F AMU~IES STEM 

2 EDUCATION lNTERAGENGY SUBCOMMITTEE.-

3 (1) IN GENERAL.-The Director of the Office of 

4 Science and Technology Policy shall establish a subS committee under the Committee on STEM Edu6 cation of the National Science and Technology 

7 Council (established under section 101 of the Amer8 ica COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010) to 

9 coordinate Federal programs and . policies for 

10 transitioning and training veterans and military 

11 spouses for STEM careers. 

12 (2) DUTIES OF SUBCOMMITTEE.-The sub13 committee established under paragraph (l) shall14 (A) coordinate Federal agency STEM out15 reach activities and programs for veterans and 

16 military spouses; and 

17 (B) develop and facilitate the implementa18 tion by participating agencies of a strategic 

1 9 plan, which shall20 (i) specify and prioritize short- and 

21 long-tenn objectives; 

22 (ii) specifY the common metrics that 

23 will be used by Federal agencies to assess 

24 progress toward achieving such objectives; 

g:WHLC\110S17\110817.214.xml 

November a, 2017 (4:33p.m.) 

(68013912) 
377 

G:\CMTE\Sal5\SC1ENCE\STEM_002.XML 

7 

1 (iii) identify barriers veterans face in 

2 reentering the workforce, including a lack 

3 of formal STEM education, career guid4 ance, and the process of transferring mili5 tary credits and skills to college credits; 

6 (iv) identify barriers military spouses 

7 face in establishing careers in STEM 

8 fields; 

9 (v) describe the approaches that each 

10 participating agency will take to address 

11 administratively the barriers described in 

12 clauses (iii) and (iv); and 

13 (vi) identify any barriers that require 

14 li1

ederal or State legislative or regulatory 

15 changes in order to be addressed. 

16 (3) DUTIES OF OSTP.-The Director of the Of17 :lice of Science and Technology Policy shall encour18 age and monitor the efforts of the Federal ageneies 

19 participating in the subcommittee to ensure that the 

20 strategie plan required tmder paragraph (2)(B) is 

21 developed and exeeuted effectively and that the ob22 jectives of such strategic plan are met. 

23 (4) REPORT.-The Director of the Offiee of 

24 Scienee and Teehnology Polley shallg:\VHLC\110B17\110B17.214JCml 

November 8, 2017 (4:33p.m.) 

(69013912) 
378 

G:\CMTE\SC\l5\SCIENCE\STEM..._002.XML 

8 

1 (A) not later than 1 year after the date of 

2 enactment of this Act, submit to Congress the 

3 strategic plan required under paragraph (2)(B); 

4 and 

5 (B) include in the annual report required 

6 by section lOl(d) of the America COMPETES 

7 Reauthorization Act a description of any 

8 progress made in carrying out the activities de9 scribed in paragraph (2)(B) of this subsection. 

g:\VHLC\11 0817\110817.214.xml (69013lll2) 

November 8, 2017 (4;33 p.m.) 
379 

AUTHENTICATED? 

US OOVE!INME'NT 

INFORMATION 

GPO 

115THCONGRESS H R 4254 1ST SESSION 

• • 

To amend the National Science l•'oundation Authorization Act of 2002 to 

strengthen the aerospace workforce pipeline by the promotion of RDhert 

Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration internship and fellowship opportunities to women, and 

for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 6, 2017 

Mr. K'iiGHT (for himself, Ms. ESTY of Connecticut, Ms. KAPTUR, and Mrs. 

CoMSTOCK) introduced the following hill; which was referred to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

A BILL 

To amend the National Science Foundation Authorization 

Aet of 2002 to strengthen the aerospace workforce pipeline by the promotion of Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program and National Aeronautics and Space Administration internship and fellowship opportunities to 

women, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Women in Aerospace 

5 Education Act". 
380 

2 

1 SEC. 2. ROBERT NOYCE TEACHER SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM 

2 FELLOWSHIP OPPORTUNITIES. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.-Section 10 of the National 

4 Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 

5 1862n-1) is amended by adding at the end the following: 

6 "(m) FELLOWSHIP PLACEMENTS IN NATIONAL LAB7 ORATORIES AND NASA CENTERS.-The Director of the 

8 National Science :F'oundation shall encourage eligible enti9 ties administering a fellowship program using funds 

10 awarded under this section to include in such program op11 portunities for the placement of fellows in research or edu12 cation internship opportunities at national laboratories 

13 and NASA centers. The Director may give priority to pro14 posals for such placements that provide female fellows 

15 with research experience in aerospace engineering and re16 lated fields in which women are underrepresented.". 

17 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.-The amendment made by 

18 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to grants awarded 

19 on or after October 1, 2018. 

20 SEC. 3. NASA INTERNSHIP AND FELLOWSHIP OPPORTUNI21 TIES. 

22 Not later than October 1, 2018, the Administrator 

23 of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (in 

24 this section referred to as "NASA") shall institute a proc25 ess to prioritize the promotion and recruitment of qualified 

26 candidates who are women or individuals who are histori-

•HR 4254 IH 
381 

3 

cally underrepresented in the fields of science, technology, 

2 engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and computer 

3 science for internships and fellowships at N..:\SA with rel4 evance to the aerospace sector and related fields. 

0 

•BR 4254 m 
382 

G:\M\15\KNIGH1\KNIGHT_037.XML 

lows: 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 4254 

OFFERED BY MR. KNIGHT OF CALIFORNIA 

Page 2, line 3, amend subsection (a) to read as fol1 (a) IN GENERAL.-The National Science Foundation 

2 Authorization Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-368; 42 

3 U.S.C. 1862n et seq.) is amended4 (1) in section 10(a)(3)(A)(iv), by inserting ", 

5 including research experiences at national labora6 tories and NASA centers" before the semicolon; and 

7 (2) in section 10A(c)(4)-

8 (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking 

9 "and" at the end; 

10 (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking the 

11 period at the end and inserting"; and"; and 

12 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

13 "(C) providing internship opportunities for 

14 fellows, including research experiences at na15 tionallaboratories and NASA Centers.". 

Page 2, line 17, strike "amendment" and insert 

"amendments". 

g:IVHLC\1113171111317.087.xml 

November 13,2017 (11:32 a.m.) 

(68042012) 
383 

G:\M\15\KNIGHl\KNIGHT _037 .XML 

2 

Page 2, line 25, strike "promotion and". 

g:\VHLC\111317\111317.087.xml 

November 13, 2017 (11 :32 a.m.) 

(68042012) 
384 

AUTHENT!CATf9 US GOVERNMENT 

!NFORMAf!ON 

GPO 

115THCONGRESS H R 3397 1ST SESSION • • 

To direct. the National Science Foundation to support STEM education 

research focused on early chihll100<L 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 25, 2017 

Ms. ROSEN (for herself, Mr. lL'<IGIIT, Mr. EVANS, Mr. MEEKS, Mr. TONKO, 

Ms. HANABUSA, Mr. BEYER, Ms. ESTY of Connecticut, Mr. CRIST, Ms. 

SLAUGHTER, and Mr. SOTO) introduced the following hill; which was referred to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

A BILL 

To direct the National Science Foundation to support STEM 

education research focused on early childhood. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 lives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Building Blocks of 

5 STEM Act". 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 The Congress finds the following: 

8 (1) The National Science Foundation has made 

9 the largest financial investment in STEM education 
385 

2 

1 of all :B~ederal ageneies, and plays a very powerful 

2 role in helping to set research and policy agendas. 

3 (2) Studies have found that children who en4 gage in scientific activities from an early age develop 

5 positive attitudes toward science and are more likely 

6 to pursue STEM expertise and careers later on. 

7 (3) However, the majority of current research 

8 focuses on increasing STEM opportunities for stu9 dents in middle school and older. 

10 ( 4) Women remain widely underrepresented in 

11 the STEM workforce and this gender disparity ex12 tends down through all levels of education. Strateg-ic 

13 funding of programs is needed in order to under14 stand and address the root cause of this gap. 

15 SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 

16 In this Act: 

17 (1) EARijY CHILDHOOD.-The term "early 

18 childhood" applies to children from birth through 

19 the age of 10. 

20 (2) STEM.-The terms "STEM" means 

21 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, 

22 including computer science. 

•HR 3397 m 
386 

3 

1 SEC. 4. SUPPORTING STEM RESEARCH ON EARLY CHILD2 HOOD. 

3 In awarding grants under the Discovery Research 

4 PreK-12 program, the Director of the National Science 

5 Foundation shall consider age distribution in order to 

6 more equitably allocate funding for research studies "'1th 

7 a focus on early childhood. 

0 

•HR 3397 IH 
387 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\H3397ANS_OOI.XML 

.AMENDMENT TO H.R. 3397 

OFFERED BY MRS. COMSTOCK OF VIRGINIA 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 

following: 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the "Building Blocks of 

3 STEM Act". 

4 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

5 The Congress finds the following: 

6 (1) The National Science Foundation has made 

7 the largest financial investment in STEM education 

8 of all Federal agencies, and plays a very powerful 

9 role in helping to set research and policy agendas. 

10 (2) Studies have found that children who en11 gage in scientific activities from an early age develop 

12 positive attitudes toward science and are more likely 

13 to pursue STEM expertise and careers later on. 

14 (3) However, the majority of current research 

15 focuses on increasing STEM opportunities for stu16 dents in middle school and older. 

17 ( 4) Women remain widely underrepresented m 

18 the STEM workforce and this gender disparity ex19 tends down through all levels of education. Strategic 

g:\VHLC\111317\111317.268.xml 

November 13, 2017 (3:47p.m.) 

(68039416) 
388 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\H3397 ANS_OO I.XML 

2 

funding of programs is needed in order to under2 stand and address the root cause of this gap. 

3 SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 

4 In this Act: 

5 (1) DIRECTOR.-The term "Director" means 

6 the Director of the National Science Foundation. 

7 (2) EARIN CHILDHOOD.-The term "early 

8 childhood" applies to children from birth through 

9 the age of 10. 

10 (3) lNS'fiTUTION OF HIGHI<JR I<JDUCATION.-The 

11 term "institution of higher education" has the 

12 meaning given the term in section 101(a) of the 

13 Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)). 

14 (4) LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY.-The term 

15 "local educational agency" has the meaning given 

16 the term in section 8101 of the Elementary and Sec17 ondary Education Act of 1965 (20 USC 7801 ), ex18 cept that such term also includes preschools, after19 school programs, and summer programs. 

20 (5) STEM.-The term "STEM" has the mean21 ing given the term in section 2 of the America COM22 PETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 ( 42 U.S.C. 

23 6621 note). 

g:\VHLC\ 111317\ 111317.268.xml 

November 13,2017 (3:47p.m.} 

(68039416) 
389 

G:\CMTE\Sal5\SCIENCE\H3397ANS_OOl.XML 

3 

1 (6) YOUNG GIRI,s.-The term "young girls" 

2 means female individuals who have not attained the 

3 age of 11. 

4 SEC. 4. SUPPORTING STEM RESEARCH ON EARLY CHILD5 HOOD. 

6 In awarding grants under the Discovery Research 

7 PreK-12 program, the Director shall consider age dis8 tribution in order to more equitably allocate funding for 

9 research studies vvith a focus on early childhood. 

10 SEC. 5. SUPPORTING GIRLS IN STEM EDUCATION AND COM11 PUTER SCIENCE. 

12 (a) RESEARCH GRA1'1TS.-

13 (1) IN GENERAh-The Director shall award 

14 grants, on a competitive basis, to institutions of 

15 higher education or nonprofit organizations (or con16 sortia of such institutions or organizations), to accel17 crate research efforts to increase understanding of 

18 the factors that contribute to the participation of 

19 young girls in STEM activities. 

20 (2) RESEARCH AREAS.-Research areas funded 

21 by a grant under this subsection may include22 (A) the role of teacher training and profes23 sional development, including effective incentive 

24 structures to encourage teachers to participate 

25 in such training and professional development, 

g:\VHlC\1113171111317.26B.xml 

November 13,2017 (3:47p.m.} 

(68039416} 
390 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\H3397ANS_OOl.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:\VHLC\111317\111317.26S.xml 

November 13,2017 (3:47p.m.) 

4 

in encouraging or discouraging young girls from 

participating in STEM activities; 

(B) the role of teachers in shaping young 

girls' perceptions of STEM and discouraging 

such girls from participating in S'fElVI activities; 

(C) the role of other facets of the learning 

environment on the willingness of young girls to 

participate in STElVI activities, including learning materials and te:xi:books, classroom decorations, seating arrangements, use of media and 

technology, classroom culture, and gender composition of students during group work; 

(D) the role of parents and other caregivers in encouraging or discouraging young 

girls from participating in STEM activities; 

(E) the types of STEM activities that elicit 

greater participation by young girls; 

(F) the role of mentorship and best practices in finding and utilizing mentors; 

(G) the role of informal and out-of-school 

STEM learning opportunities on girls' perception of and participation in STElVI activities; 

and 

(68039416) 
391 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\H3397ANS_OOI.XML 

5 

(H) any other activity the Director deter2 mines will accomplish the goals of this sub3 section. 

4 (3) GRAN'l' RECIPIENT REPORT.-An entity 

5 awarded a grant under this subsection shall report 

6 to the Director, at such time and in such manner as 

7 the Director may require, on the activities carried 

8 out and materials developed using such grant funds. 

9 (b) DEVI<JLOPMENT k'\'D TESTING OP SCALABLE 

10 MODELS POR INCREASED ENGAGEMENT.-

11 (1) IN GENERAL.-The Director shall award 

12 grants, on a competitive basis, to institutions of 

13 higher education or nonprofit organizations (or con14 sortia of such institutions or organizations), to de15 velop and evaluate interventions in pre-K and ele16 mentary school classrooms that increase participa17 tion of young girls in computer science activities. 

18 (2) PARTNERSHIPS.-In order to be eligible to 

19 receive a grant under this subsection, an institute of 

20 higher education, nonprofit organization, or consor21 tium, shall enter into a partnership with one or more 

22 local educational agency or State in carrying· out the 

23 activities funded by such grant. 

24 (3) USES OP PUI\"'DS.-Grants awarded under 

25 this subsection shall be used for activities that draw 

g:\VHLC\111317\111317.268.xml 

November 13,2017 (3:47p.m.) 

{68039416) 
392 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\SCIENCE\H3397ANS_OOI.XML 

6 

1 upon the expertise of the partner entities described 

2 in paragraph (2) to increase participation of young 

3 girls in computer science activities, including4 (A) offering training and professional de5 velopment programs, including summer or aca6 demic year institutes or workshops, designed to 

7 strengthen the capabilities of pre-K and elemen8 tary school teachers and to familiarize such 

9 teachers ·with the role of gender bias in the 

10 classroom; 

11 (B) offering innovative preservice and in12 service programs that instruct teachers on gen13 der-inclusive practices for teaching computing 

14 concepts; 

15 (C) developing distance learning programs 

16 for teachers or students, including developing 

17 curricular materials, play-based computing ac18 tivities, and other resources for the in-service 

19 professional development of teachers that are 

20 made available to teachers through the Inter21 net; 

22 (D) developing a cadre of master teachers 

23 who will promote reform and the adoption of 

24 gender-inclusive practices in teaching computer 

25 science concepts in early childhood education; 

g:\VHLC\111317\111317.268.xml 

November 13, 2017 (3:47p.m.} 

(68039416} 
393 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\H3397ANS_OOI.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\111317\111317.268.xml 

November 13, 2017 (3:47p.m.) 

7 

(E) developing tools to evaluate activities 

conducted under this subsection; 

(F) developing or adapting pre-K and elementary school computer science curricular rnaterials that incorporate contemporary research 

on the science of learning, particularly with respeet to gender inclusion; 

(G) developing and offering gender-inclus1ve computer science enrichment programs for 

students, including after-school and summer 

programs; 

(H) providing mentors for girls in person 

and through the Internet to support such girls 

in participating in computer science activities; 

(I) engaging parents of girls about the difficulties faced by girls to maintain an interest 

and desire to participate in computer science 

activities, and enlisting the help of parents in 

overcoming these difficulties; 

(J) acquainting girls with careers in computer science and encouraging girls to consider 

careers in such field; and 

(K) any other activities the Director determines will accomplish the goals of this subsection. 

(68039416) 
394 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\H3397 ANS_OOI.XML 

8 

(4) GRANT RHCIPlENT REPORT.-An entity 

2 awarded a grant under this subsection shall report 

3 to the Director, at such time and in such manner as 

4 the Director may require, on the activities carried 

5 out, materials developed using such grant funds, and 

6 the outcomes for students served by such grant. 

7 (5) EVALUATION REQUIRED.-Not later than 4 

8 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

9 Director shall evaluate the grant program under this 

10 subsection. At a minimum, such evaluation shall11 (A) use a common set of benchmarks and 

12 assessment tools to identify best practices and 

13 materials developed and demonstrated by the 

14 partnerships described in paragraph (2); and 

15 (B) to the extent practicable, compare the 

16 effectiveness of practices and materials devel17 oped and demonstrated by such partnerships 

18 \vith those of partnerships funded by other local 

19 or State government or Federal Government 

20 programs. 

21 (6) DISSEMINATION 01<' RESULTS.-

22 (A) EVALUATION RESULTS.-The Director 

23 shall make publicly available free of charg·e on 

24 an Internet website and shall submit to Cong:\VHLC\111317\111317.268.xml 

November 13,2017 (3:47p.m.) 

(68039416) 
395 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\H3397ANS_001.XML 

9 

1 gress the results of the evaluation required 

2 under paragraph (5). 

3 (B) lVlATERIALS.-The Director shall en4 sure that materials developed under a program 

5 funded by a grant under this subsection, that 

6 are demonstrated to be effective in achieving 

7 the goals of this subsection (as determined by 

8 the Director), are made publicly available free 

9 of charge on an Internet website, including 

10 through an arrangement with an outside entity. 

11 (7) ANNUAL MEETING.-The Director may con12 vene an annual meeting of the partnerships partici13 pating in a program funded by a grant under this 

14 subsection, for the purpose of fostering greater na15 tional collaboration. 

16 (8) TECHNICAL ASSISTAl~CE.-At the request of 

17 a partnership seeking a grant under this subsection, 

18 the Director shall provide the partnership with tech19 nical assistance in meeting any requirement of this 

20 subsection. 

21 SEC. 6. COMPUTER SCIENCE IN THE ROBERT NOYCE 

22 TEACHER SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM. 

23 Section 10 of the National Science Foundation Au24 thorization Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 1862n-1) is amend25 edg:\VHLC\111317\111317.268.xml 

November 13,2017 (3:47p.m.) 

(68039416) 
396 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\H3397ANS_001.XML 

10 

1 (1) by striking "and mathematics" each place it 

2 appears and inserting "mathematics, informatics, 

3 and computer science"; 

4 (2) in subsection (a)(3)(B), by striking "or 

5 mathematics" and inserting "mathematics, 

6 informatics, and computer science"; 

7 (3) m subsections (b)(l)(D)(i), (c)(l)(A), 

8 (d)(l), and (i)(7), by striking "or mathematics" 

9 each place it appears and inserting "mathematics, 

10 informatics, or computer science"; and 

11 (4) in subsection (i)(5), by striking "or mathe12 matics" and inserting "mathematics, or computer 

13 science". 

g:\VHLC\111317\111317.268.xml 

November 13, 2017 (3:47 p.m.) 

(68039416} 
(397) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUP ON H.R. 4675, 

LOW-DOSE RADIATION 

RESEARCH ACT OF 2017 

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 10, 2018 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m., in room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of the Committee at any time. 

Pursuant to Committee rule 2(e) and House rule XI(2)(h)(4), the 

Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes. 

Today, we meet to consider H.R. 4675, the Low Dose Radiation 

Research Act of 2017. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 4675, 

the Low Dose Radiation Research Act of 2017, and the clerk will 

report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 4675, a bill to amend the Energy Policy Act of 

2005 to provide for a Low Dose Radiation Basic Research Program. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

And I’ll recognize myself for an opening statement. 

H.R. 4675, the Low Dose Radiation Research Act of 2017 is bipartisan legislation, and was introduced by Representatives Roger 

Marshall, Dan Lipinski, Randy Weber, and myself. It authorizes a 

revitalized Low Dose Radiation Research Program within the Biological and Environmental Research Division of Department of Energy’s Office of Science. This research program is part of the 

Science Committee’s continued effort to ensure America remains a 

leader in basic research and innovation. 

H.R. 4675 directs DOE to identify ongoing challenges in low dose 

radiation science and develop a long-term basic research plan that 

addresses these challenges. It also directs the Department to engage with other Federal agencies and the international research 

community to develop the basic research program. This program 

will analyze any unknown health impacts of low levels of radiation, 

providing critical knowledge to our Nation’s researchers, industry, 

healthcare community and military as they handle nuclear material, maintain the Nation’s nuclear weapons program, provide medical treatment, and dispose of nuclear waste. 
398 

Low dose radiation research can also inform regulatory agencies 

that set nuclear safety standards for the public, including enabling 

Federal emergency response agencies to more accurately set areas 

of evacuation for a radiological incident like a nuclear power plant 

meltdown. 

This research is also of particular importance to practicing physicians, who rely on thorough knowledge of radiation health risk to 

decide when and how to use lifesaving diagnostics to detect and 

treat cancer in patients. 

In the last Congress, this Committee explored DOE’s ill-advised 

decision to terminate its Low Dose Radiation Research Program, 

which, until its closure in 2016, was one of the largest and most 

effective programs of its kind in the world. With so many questions 

left unanswered about the science of low dose radiation, it is no 

surprise that closure of this crucial basic research program was opposed by the scientific community. 

In a hearing last fall, the Science Committee heard from witnesses who strongly supported reprioritizing low dose radiation research at DOE. This legislation has received letters of support from 

the Health Physics Society, the American Association of Physicists 

in Medicine, the National Council on Radiation Protection and 

Measurements, and leading researchers from Northwestern University and Columbia University. Congress must reprioritize basic 

research in low dose radiation so we know we are using the best 

available science to serve and maximize our Nation’s energy, medical, and defense needs. 

Again, I thank the bill’s primary sponsors, Representative Marshall, Ranking Member Lipinski, and Chairman Weber, for their 

initiative on this issue, and I urge my colleagues on the Committee 

to support this legislation. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

Today we will consider an important Energy Subcommittee bill, H.R. 4675, the 

Low Dose Radiation Research Act of 2017. 

This bipartisan legislation was introduced by Representatives Roger Marshall, 

Dan Lipinksi, Randy Weber and myself. It authorizes a revitalized low-dose radiation research program within the Biological and Environmental Research division 

of Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science. 

This research program is part of the Science Committee’s continued effort to ensure America remains a leader in basic research and innovation. 

H.R. 4675 directs DOE to identify ongoing challenges in low-dose radiation science 

and develop a long-term basic research plan that addresses these challenges. 

It also directs the department to engage with other federal agencies and the international research community to develop the basic research program. 

This program will analyze any unknown health impacts of low levels of radiation, 

providing critical knowledge to our nation’s researchers, industry, health care community and military as they handle nuclear material, maintain the nation’s nuclear 

weapons program, provide medical treatment and dispose of nuclear waste. 

Low dose radiation research can also inform regulatory agencies that set nuclear 

safety standards for the public, including enabling federal emergency response agencies to more accurately set areas of evacuation for a radiological incident like a nuclear power plant meltdown. 

This research is also of particular importance to practicing physicians, who rely 

on thorough knowledge of radiation health risks to decide when and how to use lifesaving diagnostics to detect and treat cancer in patients. 

In the last Congress, this committee explored DOE’s ill-advised decision to terminate its low dose radiation research program, which, until its closure in 2016, was 

one of the largest and most effective programs of its kind in the world. With so 

many questions left unanswered about the science of low dose radiation, it is no sur-
399 

prise that closure of this crucial basic research program was opposed by the scientific community. 

In a hearing last fall, the Science Committee heard from witnesses who strongly 

supported reprioritizing low dose radiation research at DOE. This legislation has received letters of support from the Health Physics Society, the American Association 

of Physicists in Medicine, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements and leading researchers from Northwestern University and Columbia University. 

Congress must re-prioritize basic research in low dose radiation so we know we 

are using the best available science to serve and maximize our nation’s energy, medical and defense needs. 

Again, I thank this bill’s sponsors, Rep. Marshall, Ranking Member Lipinski and 

Chairman Weber, for their initiative on this issue and I urge my colleagues on the 

committee to support this bipartisan bill. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman from Texas, Eddie Bernice 

Johnson, the Ranking Member, is recognized for her opening statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Chairman Smith, for holding today’s markup of H.R. 4675, the Low Dose Radiation Research 

Program Act of 2017. This research is important to better understand the health impacts of exposure to low dosages of radiation 

that could result from medical tests, terrorism events, or materials 

associated with nuclear weapons in power production. 

Since its inception in 1998, the Low Dose Radiation Research 

Program at the Department of Energy had provided high-value scientific data to help determine these risks. However, its funding levels have been cut since 2012 as Obama Administration informally 

expressed its intention to end the program. And it was finally terminated last year. And thus far, the Trump Administration has not 

indicated any interest in restoring DOE’s stewardship of these activities. 

In November, GAO provided testimony before this Committee is 

a recent report—on a recent report which recommended that DOE 

lead the development of a plan for interagency collaboration on research into low dose radiation’s health effects, citing a lack of coordination efforts among Federal agencies as the Department 

began phasing out this program. 

I believe that this bipartisan bill reflects GAO’s findings and recommendations, and I have sponsored and supported similar legislative language in the past congresses. Therefore, I am pleased to 

support H.R. 4675 as well and look forward to working with my 

colleagues on both sides of the aisle, as well as the Administration, 

to restore the U.S. scientific leadership in this critical area. 

Thanks, and yield back the balance of my time. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you, Chairman Smith, for holding today’s markup of H.R. 4675, the LowDose Radiation Research Program Act of 2017. 

This research is important to better understanding the health impacts of exposure 

to low doses of radiation that could result from medical tests, terrorism events, or 

materials associated with nuclear weapons and power production. 

Since its inception in 1998, the Low Dose Radiation Research Program at the Department of Energy had provided high-value scientific data to help determine these 

risks. 

However, its funding levels have been cut since 2012, as the Obama administration informally expressed its intention to end the program, and it was finally terminated last year. And thus far the Trump Administration also has not indicated any 

interest in restoring DOE’s stewardship of these activities. 
400 

In November, GAO provided testimony before this Committee on a recent report 

which recommended that DOE lead the development of a plan for interagency collaboration on research into low dose radiation’s health effects, citing a lack of coordination efforts among federal agencies after the Department began phasing out its 

program. 

I believe that this bipartisan bill reflects GAO’s findings and recommendations, 

and I have sponsored and supported similar legislative language in the past few 

Congresses. 

Therefore I am pleased to support H.R. 4675 as well, as look forward to working 

with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle as well as the Administration to restore U.S. scientific leadership in this critical area. Thank you Chairman Smith, and 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

And the bill’s sponsor, the gentleman from Kansas, Dr. Marshall 

is recognized for his opening statement. 

Mr. MARSHALL. Good morning, and thank you, Chairman Smith, 

for the opportunity to speak on behalf of this important legislation. 

I would also like to thank the Chairman, as well as Representatives Dan Lipinski and Randy Weber, for cosponsoring H.R. 4675, 

the Low Dose Radiation Research Act of 2017. I’m grateful for their 

leadership and their commitment to biological and environmental 

science research and truly blessed to work alongside the Members 

of this Committee that have supported initiatives in basic science 

research to keep America safe and globally competitive. 

The Low Dose Radiation Research Act of 2017 requires the Department of Energy to carry out a research program on low dose 

radiation within the Office of Science. The bill directs the Department of Energy to work with key Federal agencies and research 

communities to develop a long-term strategic research plan. This 

program will increase our understanding of the health effects that 

low doses of ionizing radiation have on biological systems. 

Every day, humans are exposed to low doses of radiation. It is 

the product of industrial activities, commercial processes, medical 

procedures, and naturally occurring systems. Research has consistently shown us the adverse health effects associated with high 

doses of radiation, but the health risk associated with exposure to 

low doses of radiation are much more difficult to observe, and we 

are a long way from understanding and accurately assessing those 

risks. 

In the absence of conclusive evidence, agencies like the Department of Energy, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Environmental Protection Agency are obligated to assume that any exposure to radiation increases the risk of harmful health effects. 

Without proper research, agencies have no way to measure if there 

is a safe radiation threshold. 

Our restricted understanding of low dose radiation health risks 

directly impacts our ability to address potential radiological effects 

and medically based radiation exposures. It may also result in 

overly stringent regulatory standards, inhibiting the development 

of nuclear energy opportunities and imposing an undue economic 

burden on the American people. 

As a physician in my home State of Kansas, I’ve had a firsthand 

understanding of the crucial importance of verified research in ensuring the best medical outcomes for my patients. For instance, an 

adult patient who receives a computed tomography or CT scan of 

the torso is exposed to approximately 3 years’ worth of background 
401 

radiation at once. The CT scan is an invaluable diagnostic, replacing many invasive surgical procedures and is a medical necessity 

for countless Americans. Today, we physicians are unable to inform 

our patients of the specific health risk with these type of vital imaging processes. 

There is a broad consensus among the radiobiology community 

that more research is necessary for Federal agencies, physicians, 

and related experts to make better informed decisions regarding 

these risks. It is no surprise that H.R. 4675 has received support 

from the Health Physics Society, the American Association of 

Physicists in Medicine, the National Council on Protection and 

Measurements, and leading researchers from Northwestern University and Columbia University. 

Once again, I’d like to thank Representative Dan Lipinski, Chairman Lamar Smith, and Energy Subcommittee Chairman Randy 

Weber for cosponsoring this important legislation. I encourage my 

colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my 

time. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. MARSHALL

Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Smith, for the opportunity to speak on behalf of this important legislation. I would like to thank the chairman, as well as 

Representatives Dan Lipinski and Randy Weber, for cosponsoring H.R. 4675, the 

Low Dose Radiation Research Act of 2017. I am grateful for their leadership and 

their commitment to biological and environmental science research. And truly 

blessed to work alongside the members of this committee that have supported initiatives in basic science research to keep America safe and globally competitive. The 

Low Dose Radiation Research Act of 2017 requires the Department of Energy to 

carry out a research program on low dose radiation within the Office of Science. 

This bill directs the Department of Energy to work with key federal agencies and 

research communities to develop a long-term strategic research plan. This program 

will increase our understanding of the health effects that low doses of ionizing radiation have on biological systems. Every day, humans are exposed to low doses of 

radiation. It is the product of industrial activities, commercial processes, medical 

procedures and naturally occurring systems. Research has consistently shown us the 

adverse health effects associated with high doses of radiation. But the health risks 

associated with exposure to low doses of radiation are much more difficult to observe, and we are a long way away from understanding and accurately assessing 

this risk. 

In the absence of conclusive evidence, agencies like the Department of Energy, the 

Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency are obligated to assume that any exposure to radiation increases the risk of harmful health 

effects. Without proper research, agencies have no way to measure if there is a safe 

radiation threshold. Our restricted understanding of low-dose radiation health risks 

directly impairs our ability to address potential radiological events and 

medicallybased radiation exposures. It may also result in overly stringent regulatory 

standards, inhibiting the development of nuclear energy opportunities and posing an 

undue economic burden on the American people. 

As a physician in my home state of Kansas, I have a first-hand understanding 

of the crucial importance of verified research in ensuring the best medical outcomes 

for my patients. For instance, an adult patient who receives a computed tomography 

(or CT) scan of the torso, is exposed to approximately three years’ worth of background radiation at once. The CT scan is an invaluable diagnostic tool, replacing 

many invasive surgical procedures, and is a medical necessity for countless Americans. Today, we physicians are unable to inform our patients of the specific health 

risks associated with these types of vital imaging processes. 

There is broad consensus among the radiobiology community that more research 

is necessary for federal agencies, physicians and related experts to make 

betterinformed decisions regarding these risks. It is no surprise that H.R. 4675 has 

received support from the Health Physics Society, the American Association of 

Physicists in Medicine, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements and leading researchers from Northwestern University and Columbia University. 
402 

Once again, I would like to thank Representative Dan Lipinski, Chairman Lamar 

Smith and Energy Subcommittee Chairman Randy Weber for cosponsoring this important legislation. 

I encourage my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my 

time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Marshall. 

And the gentleman from Illinois, the Ranking Member of the Research and Technology Subcommittee and the other lead sponsor of 

this legislation, is recognized. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you, 

and I want to concur with your comments and Ranking Member 

Johnson’s comments. And I want to thank Mr. Marshall for introducing this bill, and I’m pleased to join him as the lead Democratic 

cosponsor of this bill. 

Low dose radiation research is a critical field that can provide 

important insights into the biological response of cells to low levels 

of ionizing radiation. This research has obvious potential impacts 

in the field of diagnostic medicine but will also provide crucial information for nuclear energy industry, environmental cleanup operations, and our national security. 

Almost 20 years ago, the Department of Energy began funding 

research into low dose radiation. During the program’s history, 

DOE’s research has resulted in a number of important advancements in our understanding of cellular response to radiation exposure. However, during the Obama Administration, officials at the 

Department of Energy decided that this work was no longer a priority and proposed to ramp down funding and eventually eliminate 

this work. 

Appropriators followed this recommendation, and without a statutory authorization in place, the Low Dose Radiation Research Program was eliminated. The current Administration did not propose 

new funding for this research in Fiscal Year 2018 in their budget 

request, and we do not expect anything different in the budget proposal we will see for 2019. 

The process by which the Low Dose Radiation Research Program 

was eliminated underscores the importance of this bill. As an authorizing Committee, it is crucial that we hear from the experts, 

consider the body of evidence, and determine the priorities of the 

agencies that are under our jurisdiction. That is our job. 

In the last several years, a variety of stakeholders, as well as the 

Government Accountability Office, have weighed in on the need for 

this research. And our Committee has heard the same in two hearings on this topic in the last 2 years. That’s why I’m happy to serve 

as the lead Democratic cosponsor of this small but very important 

research bill. 

I’m hopeful that during the next several months we can follow 

the model we followed on this bill and pass other well-vetted bipartisan bills out of this Committee. I encourage my colleagues to support the bill and such continued efforts. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski. 

And the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Dunn, is recognized. 

Mr. DUNN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking 

Member Johnson. I want to thank all of you for convening this 
403 

meeting to take into consideration H.R. 4675, the Low Dose Radiation Research Act of 2017. I also want to congratulate my classmate and my friend Dr. Marshall and his cosponsor Mr. Lipinski for investing the time to 

produce this bill. 

During the Committee’s hearing on the subject, Dr. Brink from 

the American College of Radiology testified that more than a million patients a year receive the benefits of radiation treatment, 

which include extended life and relief from pain and suffering. Improving our scientific understanding of the effects of exposure to 

low dose radiation will accelerate development of advanced diagnostic and therapeutic procedures and enhance the acceptance of 

controlled use of radiation among patients and doctors, which will 

improve the quality of care and save lives. 

And this legislation like 4675 makes me optimistic for my children and my grandchildren’s future and why I’m honored to serve 

on this Committee with all of you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Dunn. 

If there’s no further discussion, we will go to amendments—and 

I’m aware of two—both to be offered by Mr. Foster, and he is recognized for the purpose of offering the first one. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at 

the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 4675 offered by Mr. Foster of Illinois, amendment number 74. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman from Illinois is recognized to explain his amendment. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you. My amendments would simply direct 

the Secretary to identify and, to the extent possible, to quantify the 

potential benefits to stakeholders of the Low Dose Radiation Research Program and different components of it. 

The research that comes out of this program will have a number 

of uses across several agencies and sectors, including the private 

sector and the public at large. For instance, if we learn that astronauts could be safely exposed to slightly higher levels of radiation, 

this could have potential cost-saving implications for manned 

spaceship design or the reverse is possible. To the extent that medical treatment and diagnosis represents a tradeoff between radiation and health benefits, then we can get to a more science-based 

position there. 

Environmental remediation from radon in basements to the 

cleanup of legacy sites, legacy weapons sites to the safety of nuclear workers are other important examples where you have to 

make sure that the research you’re doing matches the actual application in the real world. So an effort to quantify to the extent possible these potential benefits is essential to ensuring that the Low 

Dose Radiation Program properly prioritizes questions with the 

greatest real-world impact. 

The funding that we all hope will become available for this program will not be infinite, and it’s important that when the program 

is restarted, that it is restarted especially in the areas that will 
404 

really, you know, make the world a safer and less expensive place 

to live in. 

So I’m pleased to see such strong bipartisan support and join 

with my colleagues in supporting the reinstatement of a Low Dose 

Research Radiation Program in DOE. I believe that my amendment 

will help insure not only the best use of DOE’s limited resources 

but also the long-term success of the Low Dose Radiation Research 

Program. 

I understand that the Chairman supports this amendment and 

will accept it, so I’d like to thank him and Ranking Member Johnson for their support and yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. And thank you, Mr. Foster. You’re correct. I’ll 

recognize myself in support of the amendment. 

The amendment would add a requirement that the Secretary of 

Energy identify potential monetary and health-related benefits that 

could occur through the results of the research program authorized 

in this legislation. So this is a commonsense amendment that seeks 

to show the value of continued investments in basic research like 

the Low Dose Radiation Research Program. I encourage Members 

to support the amendment. 

Is there any further discussion on the amendment? 

The Ranking Member Ms. Johnson is recognized. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I’d like to move to strike the last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I support this amendment and appreciate Dr. Foster’s work to 

improve the legislation we’re considering today. 

As we heard during the Committee hearing that took place in 

November, research into low dose radiation can have far-reaching 

impacts in a variety of industries and disciplines. One of the key 

takeaways from that hearing is that the economic and health benefits from this research are likely numerous but unknown. I support 

this important addition to the program’s scope directing the Department to consider the potential benefits to key stakeholders in 

government, academia, and private industry, would provide helpful 

guidance to the program and would ensure that the benefits of the 

research are well recognized. And I encourage my colleagues to join 

me in supporting the amendments, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

If there’s no further discussion, the question is on agreeing to the 

amendment. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The amendment is agreed to. And the gentleman is recognized 

for purposes of offering the next amendment. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have another amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 4675 offered by Mr. Foster of Illinois, amendment number 72. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman continues to be recognized. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, Chairman Smith. 
405 

A few months ago, we held a Subcommittee hearing on the Low 

Dose Radiation Research Program at the Department of Energy. It 

was a very productive and bipartisan discussion, although I remain 

disappointed that no one from the Department of Energy was there 

to participate. 

I join with my Republican colleagues in supporting the reinstatement of the Low Dose Radiation Research Program at DOE. I appreciate that this bill acknowledges the need to formulate scientific 

goals for the low dose program and that it instructs the Secretary 

to consult with and engage with other Federal agencies. I believe 

this is key to ensuring the success of a renewed effort on low dose 

radiation. 

And given the bipartisan support for this program, however, I 

was disappointed to see that the underlying bill expects the Department of Energy to start this new research program with no 

new funding. You know, it seems as though we used to have bipartisan agreement in Congress that when we ask the government to 

spend more money, that we would actually specify how to pay for 

it rather than pushing the debt onto our children, but it appears 

in recent times that that bipartisan agreement seems to have vanished. 

So my amendment today simply corrects this by increasing the 

authorization for the BER program by the amount dictated in the 

underlying bill. It’s irresponsible, I believe, to direct DOE to undertake new research—a new research program with no new funding, 

and that would inevitably mean that another valuable area of research within BER would suffer. 

Now, I understand the Chair is opposed the amendment, and as 

a courtesy to him, I will be withdrawing it, but I do hope to work 

with my Republican colleagues to increase funding for the BER 

program so that the Low Dose Radiation Program can be properly 

funded. 

Thank you, and I withdraw this amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn. I thank the gentleman from Illinois for his thoughtful comments and will continue to work with him on the program. 

Is there any further discussion or any more amendments to be 

offered? 

And if not, a reporting quorum being present, I move that the 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 4675 to 

the House as amended with the recommendation that the bill be 

approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 4675 to the House, 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

And opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

and H.R. 4675 is ordered reported to the House. 

I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any 

necessary technical and conforming changes. And without objection, so ordered. 
406 

If there’s no further discussion, that completes our business. This 

concludes the Science Committee markup, and without objection, 

we stand adjourned, but I also want to thank all the Members who 

came today to this markup. It wasn’t expected to be long, but I always appreciate their presence. We have three doctors present on 

our side, all of whom will have a special interest in this bill as well, 

as does the gentleman from Illinois, who has the Ph.D. in physics. 

So we stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 10:25 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 
(407) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 4675, AMENDMENT ROSTER
408 

US AUTH<Nncmo~ OOVERNMI:::J'IT 

INFORMATIO~ 

GPO 

115THCONGRESS H R 4675 1ST SESSION • • 

To amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to provide for a low-dose radiation 

basic research program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 18, 2017 

Mr. 11ARsiiALL (for himself, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mr. SMITH of Texas, and Mr. 

WEBER of Texas) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

A BILL 

To amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to provide for 

a low-dose radiation basic research program. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Low-Dose Radiation 

5 Research Act of 2017". 

6 SEC. 2. LOW-DOSE RADIATION RESEARCH PROGRAM. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.-Subtitle G of title IX of the En8 ergy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16311 et seq.) is 

9 amended by inserting after section 977 the following new 

10 section: 
409 

2 

1 "SEC. 977A. LOW·DOSE RADIATION RESEARCH PROGRAM. 

2 "(a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary shall carry out a 

3 basic research program on low-dose radiation to4 "(1) enhance the scientific understanding of, 

5 and reduce uncertainties associated with, the effects 

6 of exposure to low-dose radiation; and 

7 "(2) inform improved risk-assessment and risk8 management methods with respect to such radiation. 

9 "(b) PROGRAM COMPONENTS.-ln carrying out the 

10 program required under subsection (a), the Secretmy 

11 shall12 "(1) formulate scientific goals for low-dose radi13 ation basic research in the United States; 

14 "(2) identify ongoing scientific challenges for 

15 understanding the long-term effects of ionizing radi16 ation on biological systems; 

17 "(3) develop a long-term strategic and 

18 prioritized basic research agenda to address such 

19 scientific challenges in coordination with other re20 search efforts; 

21 "( 4) leverage the collective body of knowledge 

22 from existing low-dose radiation research; and 

23 "(5) engage with other Federal agencies, re24 search communities, and potential users of informa25 tion produced under this section, including institu-

•HR 4675 m 
410 

3 

tions concerning radiation research, medical physics, 

2 radiology, health physics, and emergency response. 

3 "(c) COORDINATION.-In carrying out the program, 

4 the Secretary, in coordination with the Physical Science 

5 Subcommittee of the National Science and Technology 

6 Council, shall7 "(1) support the directives under section 106 of 

8 the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act 

9 (42 U.S.C. 6601 note); 

10 "(2) ensure that the Office of Science of the 

11 Department of Energy consults with the National 

12 Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National 

13 Institutes of Health, the Environmental Protection 

14 Agency, the Department of Defense, the Nuclear 

15 Regulatory Commission, and the Department of 

16 Homeland Security; 

17 "(3) advise and assist the National Science and 

18 Technology Council on policies and initiatives in ra19 diation biology, including enhancing scientific knowl20 edge of the effects of low-dose radiation on biological 

21 systems to improve radiation risk-assessment and 

22 risk-management methods; and 

23 "( 4) identify opportunities to stimulate inter24 national cooperation relating to low-dose radiation 

•HR 4675 IH 
411 

4 

and leverage research and knowledge from sources 

2 outside of the United States. 

3 "(d) l~ESEARCH Plu\N.-Not later than 180 days 

4 after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 

5 transmit to the Committee on Science, Space, and Tech6 no logy of the House of Representatives and the Committee 

7 on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a 4-year 

8 research plan that identifies and prioritizes basic research 

9 needs relating to low-dose radiation. In developing such 

10 plan, the Secretary shall incorporate the components dell scribed in subsection (b). 

12 "(e) DEFINITION OF LOW-DOSE RADIATION.-ln 

13 this section, the term 'low-dose radiation' means a radi14 ation dose of less than 100 millisieverts. 

15 "(f) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.-Nothing in this sec16 tion shall be construed to subject any research carried out 

17 by the Secretary for the program under this section to 

18 any limitations described in 977(e) of the Energy Policy 

19 Act of2005 (42 U.S.C. 16317(e)). 

20 "(g) FUNDING.-For purposes of carrying out this 

21 section, the Secretary is authorized to make available from 

22 funds provided to the Biological and Environmental Re23 search Program24 "(1) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

25 "(2) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2019; 

•HR 4&75 m 
412 

5 

"(3) $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2020; and 

2 "(4) $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2021.". 

3 (b) CoNFORMING Ai\mNDMENT.-The table of con4 tents for subtitle G of title IX of the Energy Policy Act 

5 of 2005 is amended by inserting after the item relating 

6 to section 977 the following: 

"977A. r,ow-dose radiation research program.". 

0 

•HR 4675 m 
413 

G:\M\15\FOSTER\FOSTER_074.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 4675 

OFFERED BY MR. FOSTER OF ILLINOIS 

Page 2, line 21, insert after paragraph (3) the following' (and redesignate accordingly): 

1 ( 4) identifY and, to the extent possible, quan2 tify, potential monetary and health-related benefits 

3 to Federal agencies, the general public, industry, re4 search communities, and other users of information 

5 produced by such research program; 

g:\VHLC\01 0918\010918.1 08.xml 

January9, 2018 (2:11p.m.} 

(68383713} 
414 

G:\M\15\FOSTER\FOSTER_072.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 4675 

OFFERED BY MR. FOSTER OF ILLINOIS 

Page 4 line 20 through page 5, line 2, amend subsection (g) to read as follows: 

1 "(g) FUNDING.-There are authorized to be appro2 priated to the Secretary for the Biological and Environ3 mental Research Program4 "(1) $632,000,000 for fiscal year 2018, of 

5 which $20,000,000 shall be to carry out this section; 

6 "(2) $632,000,000 for fiscal year 2019, of 

7 which $20,000,000 shall be to carry out this section; 

8 "(3) $642,000,000 for fiscal year 2020, of 

9 which $30,000,000 shall be to carry out this section; 

10 and 

11 "( 4) $642,000,000 for fiscal year 2021, of 

12 which $30,000,000 shall be to carry out this section. 

g:\VHLC\01081B\010B18.062.xml 

January B, 2018 (12:40 p.m.) 

(68373013) 
(415) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUPS: H.R. 5345, AMERICAN 

LEADERSHIP IN SPACE TECHNOLOGY 

AND ADVANCED ROCKETRY ACT; 

H.R. 5346, COMMERCIAL SPACE 

SUPPORT VEHICLE ACT; AND 

H.R. 5086, INNOVATIONS TO 

ENTREPRENEURS ACT OF 2018 

THURSDAY, MARCH 22, 2018 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:01 a.m., in room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of the Committee at any time. 

Pursuant to Committee rule 2(e) and House rule XI(2)(h)(4), the 

Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes. 

Today, we meet to consider H.R. 5345, the American Leadership 

in Space Technology and Advanced Rocketry Act; H.R. 5346, the 

Commercial Space Support Vehicle Act; and H.R. 5086, the 

Innovators to Entrepreneurs Act of 2018. I’ll recognize myself for an 

opening statement. I appreciate the Members who are here. We 

don’t expect any amendments. All these bills are bipartisan, so this 

should not take long. And my opening statement is going to cover 

all three bills, so we’ll try to expedite in that way as well. 

We are going—the third bill is sponsored by Representative Lipinski, and we are going to wait for him to arrive when we get to 

that third bill if he’s not already here. 

First, we will consider two space bills. Together, the two bills 

help ensure that America remains competitive in space. Both bills 

are the product of bipartisan consultation between the majority 

and minority Members and staff. The first space bill is H.R. 5345, 

the American Leadership in Space Technology and Advanced Rocketry Act. This bipartisan legislation, sponsored by Space Subcommittee Vice Chair Mo Brooks and cosponsored by Ed 

Perlmutter, directs the Marshall Space Flight Center to provide national leadership in rocket propulsion and support the development 

of new and emerging technologies related to rocket propulsion. 
416 

Rocket propulsion is the foundation for everything America does 

in space from launching satellites that help us forecast the weather 

and communicate around the world to exploration missions that 

reach out far into the solar system and beyond. The Marshall 

Space Flight Center’s home of Huntsville, Alabama, has been at 

the center of rocket propulsion since the establishment of Army 

rocket research and development activities at the Redstone Arsenal 

in 1950. Marshall’s expertise supports the national effort to keep 

our rocket propulsion industrial base vibrant and healthy and ensures that America stays at the forefront of rocket propulsion technology. 

The next bill is H.R. 5346, the Commercial Space Support Vehicle Act. This bipartisan legislation, sponsored by Representative 

Bill Posey and cosponsored by Representative Al Lawson, authorizes the Secretary of Transportation to license hybrid launch vehicles to provide space support flights such as crew and space flight 

participant training. 

The Trump Administration, under the direction of the Vice President and the National Space Council, has tasked the Secretary of 

Transportation to reform commercial space launch regulations by 

March 1, 2019. The bill instructs the Transportation Secretary to 

consult with the commercial space industry prior to issuing the notice of proposed rulemaking and to issue space support vehicle licensing regulations by March 1, 2019. The intent of this provision 

is to make these new commercial space support vehicle licenses 

part of the reform effort. 

I want to thank this bill’s sponsor, Representative Bill Posey, for 

his longstanding support of the commercial space industry and for 

his persistence on this space commerce regulatory reform effort. 

The final bill is H.R. 5086, the Innovators to Entrepreneurs Act. The bill extends the National Science Foundation’s Innovation 

Corps (I-Corps) program, which trains and prepares scientists and 

engineers to convert their research results into entrepreneurial opportunities. H.R. 5086 expands who is eligible to participate in ICorps courses, allowing Small Business Innovation Research and 

Small Business Technology Transfer grants to be used to cover ICorps training expenses. The bill also authorizes a new I-Corps 

course that teaches skills, including company organization, attracting investors, and hiring. 

I thank Representative Dan Webster and Research and Technology Subcommittee Ranking Member Dan Lipinski for their work 

on this legislation. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

Today we meet to consider three bills. 

First, we will consider two space bills. Together, the two bills help ensure that 

America remains competitive in space. Both bills are the product of bipartisan consultation between the majority and minority members and staff. 

The first space bill is H.R. 5345, the American Leadership in Space Technology 

and Advanced Rocketry Act. This bipartisan legislation, sponsored by Space Subcommittee Vice Chair Mo Brooks, and cosponsored by Rep. Ed Perlmutter, directs 

the Marshall Space Flight Center to provide national leadership in rocket propulsion and support the development of new and emerging technologies related to rocket propulsion. 

Rocket propulsion is the foundation for everything America does in space from 

launching satellites that help us forecast the weather and communicate around the 

world to exploration missions that reach out far into the solar system and beyond. 
417 

The Marshall Space Flight Center’s home of Huntsville, Alabama, has been at the 

center of rocket propulsion since the establishment of Army rocket research and development activities at the Redstone Arsenal in 1950. 

Marshall’s expertise supports the national effort to keep our rocket propulsion industrial base vibrant and healthy and ensures that America stays at the forefront 

of rocket propulsion technology. 

The next bill is H.R. 5346, the Commercial Space Support Vehicle Act. This bipartisan legislation, sponsored by Rep. Bill Posey and cosponsored by Rep. Al Lawson, 

authorizes the secretary of transportation to license hybrid launch vehicles to provide space support flights such as crew and space flight participant training. 

The Trump administration, under the direction of the vice president and the National Space Council, has tasked the secretary of transportation to reform commercial space launch regulations by March 1, 2019. 

The bill instructs the transportation secretary to consult with the commercial 

space industry prior to issuing the notice of proposed rulemaking and to issue space 

support vehicle licensing regulations by March 1, 2019. 

The intent of this provision is to make these new commercial space support vehicle licenses part of this reform effort. 

I want to thank this bill’s sponsor, Rep. Bill Posey, for his long-standing support 

of the commercial space industry and for his persistence on this space commerce 

regulatory reform effort. 

The final bill is H.R. 5086, the Innovators to Entrepreneurs Act. The bill extends 

the National Science Foundation’s Innovation Corps (I-Corps) program, which trains 

and prepares scientists and engineers to convert their research results into entrepreneurial opportunities. 

H.R. 5086 expands who is eligible to participate in I-Corps courses, allowing 

Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer 

grants to be used to cover I-Corps training expenses. 

The bill also authorizes a new I-Corps course that teaches skills including company organization, attracting investors and hiring. 

I thank Rep. Daniel Webster and Research and Technology Subcommittee Ranking Member Dan Lipinski for their work on this legislation. 

Chairman SMITH. And that concludes my opening statement, and 

the Ranking Member today, the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Lipinski, is recognized for his opening statement. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you, Chairman Smith, for holding today’s 

bipartisan markup. The first bill we’re considering is American 

Leadership in Space Technology and Advanced Rocketry Act sponsored by Mr. Brooks. 

This bill recognizes the rocket propulsion work of the Marshall 

Space Flight Center. That work, as well as all the other work that’s 

carried out at our various NASA centers around the country, is 

vital to American technological advancement in aerospace, and it’s 

worthwhile that we recognize that. 

I’ve had the opportunity to visit the—visit Marshall, and it was 

very impressive. I’m glad that I’ve had the opportunity to do that 

when I was down with Mr. Brooks a few years ago holding a field 

hearing down there, so it was good to get to experience that myself 

and all the work that they’re doing there. 

Second, we will consider the Commercial Space Support Vehicle 

Act introduced by Congressman Posey. This bill amends existing 

law to provide the Secretary of Transportation with authority to license or permit space support vehicles for space support flights 

such as crew training or research and development that are related 

to space launch or reentry. 

I understand that the goal of these amendments is to provide the 

industry with greater statutory clarity, as well as to simplify the 

licensing process for commercial space missions. To that end, I 

think we should get feedback from the affected industry and make 
418 

any appropriate adjustments to the legislation before we move toward enactment. 

In addition, Mr. Chairman, it is important that FAA’s Office of 

Commercial Space Transportation is sufficiently resourced to accommodate any additional work so that the office can continue to 

focus on its core responsibilities of licensing and permitting commercial space launch and reentry vehicles. The U.S. commercial 

space launch industry is really in a resurgence right now, and we 

need to be doing what we can to ensure that research continues. 

And third, we are marking up—the bill we are marking up is 

H.R. 5086, the bill that I introduced, the Innovators to Entrepreneurs Act of 2018, which is cosponsored by Mr. Weber and 

Ranking Member Johnson. This bill seeks to expand participation 

in the National Science Foundation’s highly successful I-Corps program and to broaden the scope of curriculum offered. 

The I-Corps program helps increase the return on investment to 

Federal R&D dollars in the form of increased jobs and economic opportunity. And I’ll say more about that when the bill is brought up. 

But I want to thank the Chairman for—especially on that bill—on 

my bill, bringing that up and being willing to work with me on 

that. And I thank the Chairman for, you know, all of these bipartisan bills that we are working on here today, so thank you. 

With that, I’ll yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. LIPINSKI

Thank you Chairman Smith for holding today’s bipartisan markup. The first bill 

we are considering is the American Leadership in Space Technology and Advanced 

Rocketry Act, sponsored by Mr. Brooks. This bill recognizes the rocket propulsion 

work of the Marshall Space Flight Center. That work, as well as all the other work 

that is carried out at our various NASA centers around the country, is vital to 

American technological advancement in aerospace, and it is worthwhile to recognize 

that. 

Second, we will consider the Commercial Space Support Vehicle Act, introduced 

by Congressman Posey. This bill amends existing law to provide the Secretary of 

Transportation with authority to license or permit space support vehicles for space 

support flights, such as crew training or research and development, that are related 

to space launch or reentry. I understand that the goal of these amendments is to 

provide the industry with greater statutory clarity, as well as to simplify the licensing process for commercial space missions. To that end, I think we should get feedback from the affected industry and make any appropriate adjustments to the legislation before we move towards enactment. 

In addition, Mr. Chairman, it is important that FAA’s Office of Commercial Space 

Transportation is sufficiently resourced to accommodate any additional work so that 

the Office can continue to focus on its core responsibilities of licensing and permitting commercial space launch and reentry vehicles. The U.S. commercial space 

launch industry is really in a resurgence right now, and we need to be doing what 

we can to ensure that resurgence continues. 

Third, the bill we are marking up is H.R. 5086, my Innovators to Entrepreneurs 

Act of 2018, cosponsored by Mr. Webster and Ranking Member Johnson. This bill 

seeks to expand participation in the National Science Foundation’s highly successful 

I-Corps program and to broaden the scope of curriculum offered. The I-Corps program helps increase the return on investment to Federal R&D dollars in the form 

of increased jobs and economic output. 

Thank you for calling today’s markup, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski. 

H.R. 5345 

Chairman SMITH. And pursuant to notice, I call up H.R. 5345, 

the American Leadership in Space Technology and Advanced Rocketry Act, and the clerk will report the bill. 
419 

The CLERK. H.R. 5345, a bill to designate the Marshall Space 

Flight Center of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to provide leadership for the U.S. rocket propulsion industrial 

base and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

And the bill’s sponsor, the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Brooks, 

is recognized for his opening statement. 

Mr. BROOKS. Take this opportunity to thank Chairman Smith 

and Representative Perlmutter for the roles that they played in allowing this bill to come up, and especially Representative 

Perlmutter for agreeing to cosponsor it in a very bipartisan fashion. 

As the Congressman for the Tennessee Valley of north Alabama, 

I appreciate and understand the unique and valuable contribution 

that rocket propulsion has provided America. 

On a more personal note, I very well remember growing up as 

a young lad in Huntsville, Alabama, as the Saturn V rockets were 

test-fired not far away. The earth would shake, the windows would 

rattle, and the dishes would sometimes fall out of the cabinets. I 

didn’t understand the full meaning of that, though, until 1969 

when it was those rockets that allowed America to be the first and 

only Nation to date that has been able to send astronauts to the 

moon and successfully return them. 

The best way forward for the United States to maintain its leadership position in space exploration utilization is to support our 

Nation’s work and investment in rocket propulsion because rocket 

propulsion is the foundational capability for everything we do in 

space. 

By way of background, in my district the Marshall Space Flight 

Center provides expertise in solid and liquid rocket propulsion, as 

well as advanced rocket propulsion technology to enable a wide 

array of future activity in space. 

Over the last several years, America has witnessed the beginnings of a resurgence in the rocket propulsion industry. As these 

traditional and emerging actors continue to move forward, it is important that we support healthy cooperation and communication 

between these companies and the Federal Government to ensure 

that America maintains a robust and healthy rocket propulsion industry. 

As this Committee continues its work to guide our national space 

policy, we must ensure a strong foundation and bold leadership in 

rocket propulsion, a robust industrial base that can develop and 

capitalize on better rocket propulsion technology. Therefore, I have 

introduced the American Leadership in Space Technology and Advanced Rocketry Act of 2018, also known as the ALSTAR Act. 

At this point, let me read two paragraphs from the act that pretty well summarize the intent of this legislation. In effect, ALSTAR 

formalizes and preserves the Marshall Space Flight Center’s historical role in rocket propulsion. Quoting from the act, ‘‘It is the sense 

of Congress that the Marshall Space Flight Center is the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration’s lead center for rocket propulsion and essential to sustaining and promoting U.S. leadership 

in rocket propulsion and developing the next generation of rocket 

propulsion capabilities. The Marshall Space Flight Center shall 
420 

provide national leadership in rocket propulsion,’’ thereafter listing 

a number of ways in which the Marshall Space Flight Center is to 

do that. 

This bill helps to ensure the long-term stability of the rocket propulsion industry through better coordination and collaboration between all relevant stakeholders, Federal and private. This bill also 

directs Marshall to explore, develop, and mature new rocket propulsion technology in cooperation with partners across and outside 

of government. This new growth, while building on a strong foundation, will ensure that America remains at the forefront of space 

exploration. 

NASA must once again challenge itself to reach far beyond its 

limits. Through attention, focus, and support of the utilization of 

space and the exploration of deep space, we will be able to once 

again inspire the next generation to look to the starts and aspire 

to do the impossible. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Brooks. 

Does the—I am glad to see that the cosponsor of the legislation 

seeks to be recognized. We want him to be on the record. And the 

gentleman is so recognized. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I want to thank 

Mr. Brooks for bringing this piece of legislation. And I wanted to 

support this legislation and cosponsor it because Huntsville, the 

Marshall Space Center, is one of 10 centers that NASA uses to 

make sure that we’re preeminent in the space program and that we 

will get our astronauts out there, we will get our robots out into 

outer space. We will explore. 

And the historic role that Huntsville has played in the space program is its current role and now will be its future role, to be at 

the center of getting our space program into outer space, pretty 

simple, but I wanted to encourage this network that we have that 

is really second to none in the world, and we’ve got to keep it that 

way. 

So, for me, cosponsoring this bill was very easy. It is something 

that I think will remind people, whether they’re in Alabama or Colorado or California, that this is important to America, that our role 

and our willingness to explore and get our capsules and our people 

into outer space is key. And Huntsville plays a critical role in that, 

and that’s why I support this bill. 

And I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Perlmutter. 

If there’s no further discussion, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 5345 to the House with the recommendation 

that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 5345 to the House. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

Congratulations to you all. 
421 

H.R. 5346 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 5346, 

the Commercial Space Support Vehicle Act, and the clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 5346, a bill to amend title 51, United States 

Code, to provide for licenses and experimental permits for space 

support vehicles and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. And without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

And the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Posey, is recognized for his 

statement. 

Mr. POSEY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I want to 

first and foremost thank the staff for their diligence in perfecting 

this legislation that we need. 

A GAO report last year recommended that the Federal Aviation 

Administration examine its current regulatory framework for space 

support vehicles and suggest legislative or regulatory changes as 

applicable. The Commercial Space Vehicle Support Act was largely 

developed with input from the Department of Transportation report on the permitting process of hybrid launch vehicles to enable 

non-launch flight operations. NASA has used them for years to conduct parabolic experiments where they go up and down and do the 

gravity-sensitivity checks that they want. It’s much cheaper to use 

an F–104 than it is to launch a rocket costing millions of dollars 

to do those kind of experiments. 

The Department of Transportation report concluded that the option of having a single statutory regime and regulatory office oversee a demonstrated commercial space program throughout its operational lifecycle would allow consistent application of regulatory 

philosophy and safety oversight and be more efficient and cost-effective for the launch operator, as well as the licensing agency. 

The Commercial Space Support Vehicle Act provides an appropriate regulatory approach by authorizing the Secretary of Transportation to develop regulations by March 1, 2019, allowing license 

space support flights. 

I’d like to ask unanimous consent to include in the record a letter 

of support from Virgin Galactic for H.R. 5346, the Commercial 

Space Support Vehicle Act. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Without objection, so ordered. 

Mr. POSEY. As mentioned by Chairman Smith and the Ranking 

Member Lipinski, the intent is to include the development of regulations in the regulatory reform process that the Vice President 

and the National Space Council tasks the Federal Aviation Administration to comply by the date previously mentioned. I thank you 

very much and yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Posey. 

If there is no further discussion, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 5346 to the House with the recommendation 

that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 5346 to the House. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, say nay. 
422 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported—ordered—is 

ordered reported favorably. 

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

H.R. 5086 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, we call up H.R. 5086, the 

Innovators to Entrepreneurs Act of 2018. And the clerk will report 

the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 5086, a bill to require the Director of the National Science Foundation to develop an I-Corps course to support 

commercialization-ready innovation companies and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

And we will now recognize the bill’s sponsor, the gentleman from 

Illinois, Mr. Lipinski, for his statement. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

As you and Members of this Committee are aware, I’ve been the 

leading advocate—putting it mildly—for the National Science 

Foundation Innovation Corps or I-Corps program since its inception. I led the legislative effort that authorized I-Corps as part of 

the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act that became law 

at the end of the last Congress. 

The I-Corps program offers valuable entrepreneurial education 

primarily to scientists and engineers who are college research faculty, graduate students, and postdoctoral fellows. The purpose is to 

help these individuals develop new, innovative products from the 

world-class research they conduct in their labs. The program has 

had tremendous success at NSF and has been expanded to other 

agencies, including DOE, NIH, DOD, USDA, and DHS. It has 

helped create new entrepreneurs and new tech jobs and is helping 

Federal taxpayers get the most out of their investment in research. 

The I-Corps program has been successful in part due to its focus 

on providing education and mentoring tailored to the needs of entrepreneurs at their particular business stage. To date, that focus 

has been on the point at which they’re first attempting to create 

a product based on research they’ve conducted in the lab, but different types of support are needed at later States as the entrepreneur forms a company and progresses toward introducing the 

product to market. 

Currently, once a team completes an I-Corps course and decides 

to take their innovation to market, they must learn how to form 

and grow a company on their own. Many scientists and engineers 

are struggling to acquire the necessary skills, and as a result, too 

many early stage companies are failing. 

To address this, NSF has piloted a course called I-Corps Go to 

teach skills like selecting a company structure, attracting investors 

and hiring a team. Due to the popularity and early success of this 

course, this bill aims to make it a formal component of the I-Corps 

program to be offered nationwide. 

This bill also aims to expand participation in I-Corps without a 

significant increase in funding. Although I’d support increasing the 

NSF’s funding in general and I-Corps funding in particular, at the 

Chairman’s request, I am moving this bill forward with only a 
423 

small authorization. The way this bill will increase participation is 

to allow any small business innovation research or small business 

technology transfer research grantee from any Federal agency to 

use their grant funds to participate in I-Corps. The bill also allows 

private citizens and entities to pay out of pocket to participate. Increased access to and participation in I-Corps will ensure that more 

American innovators have access to high-quality entrepreneurial 

education. 

The final provision of this bill is to require a Government Accountability Office report on the I-Corps program. Although NSF 

submits periodic reports about the program to Congress, to date, 

there has not been an independent review of its performance. 

I fully support I-Corps and continue to be amazed by its success, 

but as with any taxpayer-funded program, I also support independent auditing to help us learn how to improve the program. The 

Federal Government invests billions of dollars in research and development annually. I-Corps is a modest investment that leads to 

a big return on federally funded research by significantly increasing rates of research commercialization, economic activity, and job 

creation. 

Just as the creation of I-Corps program addressed an unmet 

need and helped scientists entrepreneurs bring their ideas closer to 

market, the Innovators to Entrepreneurs Act will fill an additional 

skills gap and empower more aspiring job creators to access the 

private capital they need to be commercially successful. 

I want to thank Mr. Webster and Ranking Member Johnson for 

their support and co-sponsorship of this bill. I also thank Chairman 

Smith for holding an I-Corps hearing this past December and for 

bringing up this bipartisan bill for a markup. 

The I-Corps program has been one of the most remarkable, 

maybe the most remarkable program that I have seen in my time 

here in Congress for what it’s been able to do to tap into the great 

research that is being done at our—you know, at our research universities, also starting to reach into the national labs, and it really 

does a great job of helping to really take those great innovators 

that we have, the great researchers that we have, teach them how 

to be entrepreneurs. It’s been very successful. It helps to bring back 

a good return on taxpayer dollars and create jobs, and it’s something that we all support and we all want, and I encourage all my 

colleagues to vote in favor. 

And I’ll yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski. 

And the gentleman from Florida, the cosponsor of the legislation, 

Mr. Webster, is recognized for his statement. 

Mr. WEBSTER. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and thank 

you for allowing us to be able to come forward. I thank my friend 

Mr. Lipinski for filing this. He’s certainly known as a champion of 

I-Corps and maybe the champion of I-Corps, so I’m very appreciative of that. 

This is a great piece of legislation, as the sponsor has said. The 

idea of helping the scientists and engineers and others who develop 

products, getting them to market is an important thing because 

you can have a product, but if you don’t sell it, it doesn’t really do 

anybody any good. 
424 

So through marketing and hiring and organizing and attracting 

investors and so forth, the participants in these I-Corps groups 

have a better chance of being successful, and that’s the whole idea. 

I’ve seen in Florida what a great program it is, and it has greatly 

benefited our State, and I know it has in the rest of the country. 

There have just been barriers, barriers that could not be penetrated. You couldn’t get through. This bill is going to help break 

down those barriers so that those who are developing their product 

can also get them to market. 

So I would certainly urge everyone on this Committee to vote for 

this great bipartisan bill. I think it’s going to be one of the most 

commonsense bills passed by this Congress. 

Chairman SMITH. That’s high praise. Thank you, Mr. Webster. I 

appreciate your comments. 

If there is no further discussion, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 5086 to the House with a recommendation that 

the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 5086 to the House. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

Before we officially adjourn, I think it might be of interest to 

Members to know that of the 25 bills that we have—that this Committee has taken to the House floor, 23 of the 25 have been bipartisan bills, and that’s got to be some kind of record. 

If there’s no further discussion, that completes our business, and 

this concludes the Science Committee markup. Without objection, 

the Committee stands adjourned, and thank you all again for your 

attendance. 

[Whereupon, at 9:26 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 
(425) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 5345, H.R. 5346, H.R. 5086 
426 

G:\M\15\BROOKS\BROOKS_044.XML 

(Original Signature of Member) 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H.R. 

To designate the Marshall Space Flight Center of the National Aeronautics 

and Spact> Administration to pro,~ de leadt>rship for the U.S. rocket 

propulsion industrial base, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

Mr. BROOKS of Alabama introduced the follmTing bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on------------

A BILL 

To designate the Marshall Space Flight Center of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to provide 

leadership for the U.S. rocket propulsion industrial base, 

and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "American Leadership 

5 in Space Technology and Advanced Rocketry Act" or the 

6 "AIJSTAR Act". 

g:IVHLC\031618\031618.089.xml 

March 16, 2018 (1 :17 p.m.) 

(686629117) 
427 

G:\M\15\BROOKS\BROOKS_044.XML 

2 

SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

2 Congress finds the following: 

3 (1) Rocket propulsion is an enabling technology 

4 for our Nation's future prosperous way of life. 

5 (2) Rocket propulsion technologies are critical 

6 to national security, intelligence gathering, commu7 nications, weather forecasting, navigation, commu8 nications, entertainment, land use, Earth observa9 tion, and scientific exploration. 

10 (3) The rocket propulsion industry is a source 

11 of high-quality jobs. 

12 ( 4) Multiple Federal agencies and companies 

13 are involved in rocket propulsion research, develop14 ment, and manufacturing. 

15 (5) Integration, coordination, and cooperation 

16 would strengthen the United States rocket propul17 sion industrial base. 

18 (6) Erosion of the rocket propulsion industrial 

19 base would seriously impact national security, space 

20 exploration potential, and economic growth. 

21 (7) The Marshall Space Flight Center has dec22 ades of experience working with other Government 

23 agencies and industry partners to study and coordi24 nate these capabilities. 

25 (8) The Marshall Space Flight Center has made 

26 historic and unique contributionsg:\VHLC\031618\031618.089.xml 

March 16, 2018 (1 :17 p.m.) 

(686629117) 
428 

G:\M\15\BROOKS\BROOKS_044.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

3 

(A) by bringing stakeholders together to 

work on rocket propulsion industrial base 

sustainment; 

(B) of technical expertise to key studies 

and review boards; and 

(C) by consistently participating m interageney working groups to address roeket propulsion issues. 

9 SEC. 3. ROCKET PROPULSION LEADERSHIP. 

10 (a) SENSE 0.1<' CONGRESS.-It is the sense of Con11 gress that the Marshall Space Flight Center is the N a12 tional Aeronautics and Space Administration's lead center 

13 for rocket propulsion and is essential to sustaining and 

14 promoting U.S. leadership in rocket propulsion and devel15 oping the next generation of rocket propulsion capabilities. 

16 (b) LEADERSHIP IN ROCKET PROPULSION.-The 

17 Marshall Spaee Flight Center shall provide national lead18 ership in rocket propulsion by19 (1) contributing to interagency coordination for 

20 the preservation of critical national roeket propul21 sion capabilities; 

22 (2) collaborating with industry, academia, and 

23 professional organizations to most effectively use na24 tiona! capabilities and resources; 

g:IVHLC\031618\031618.089.xml 

March 16, 2018 (1 :17 p.m.) 

(686629117) 
429 

G:\M\15\BROOKS\BROOKS_044.XML 

4 

(3) monitoring public- and private-sector rocket 

2 propulsion activities to develop and promote a 

3 strong, healthy rocket propulsion industrial base; 

4 ( 4) facilitating technical solutions for existing 

5 and emerging rocket propulsion challenges; 

6 (5) supporting the development and refinement 

7 of rocket propulsion for small satellites; 

8 (6) evaluating and recommending, as appro9 priate, new rocket propulsion technologies for furl 0 ther development; and 

11 (7) providing information required by national 

12 decisionmakers so that policies and other instru13 ments of the Government support the development 

14 and strengthening of the Nation's rocket propulsion 

15 capabilities throughout the 21st century. 

g:\VHLC\031618\031618.089.xml 

March 16,2018 (1:17 p.m.) 

(686629117) 
430 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSV _00 l.XML 

115TII CONGRESS 

2D SESSION 

(Original Signature uf Member) 

H.R. 

To amend title 51, United States Code, to provide for licenses and 

experimental permits for spaee support Yehicles, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

M . introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on _______ _ 

A BILL 

To amend title 51, United States Code, to provide for licenses and experimental permits for space support vehicles, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Commercial Space 

5 Support Vehicle Act". 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

7 Section 50902 of title 51, United States Code, IS 

8 amendedg:\VHLC\031618\031618.014.xml 

March 16, 2018 (10:02 a.m.) 

(684698124) 
431 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSV _OOI.XML 

2 

1 (1) by redesignating paragraphs (21) through 

2 (25) as paragraphs (23) through (27), respectively; 

3 and 

4 (2) by inserting after paragraph (20) the fol5 lowing: 

6 "(21) 'space support flight' means a flig'ht 

7 in the air that is8 "(A) not a launch or reentry; but 

9 "(B) related to launch or reentry serv10 Ices. 

11 "(22) 'space support vehicle' means a vehi12 cle that is13 "(A) a launch vehicle; 

14 "(B) a reentry vehicle; or 

15 "(C) a component of a launch or re16 entry vehicle.". 

17 SEC. 3. LICENSING OF SPACE SUPPORT FLIGHTS. 

18 (a) IN GENERAL.-Section 50904 of title 51, United 

19 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol20 lowing: 

21 "(e) SPACE SUPPORT FI,IGHTS.-

22 "(1) The Secretary of Transportation may issue 

23 or transfer a license for multiple space support 

24 flights of a space support vehicle to a citizen of the 

25 United States, but only if such citizen holds an operg:\VHLC\031618\031618.014.xml 

March 16, 2018 (10:02 a.m.) 

(684698124) 
432 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSV _OOI.XML 

3 

ator license issued under this chapter for launch or 

2 reentry of such space support vehicle as, or included 

3 as a component of, a launch vehicle or reentry vehi4 cle. 

5 "(2) A licensee may only carry out a space sup6 port flight of a space support vehicle under a license 

7 for carrying a person or property for compensation 

8 or hire if such flight lands at the same site from 

9 which the vehicle took flight.". 

10 (b) LIMITATION ON WAVIER OF REQUIREMENTS.-

11 Section 50905(b)(3) of title 51, United States Code, is 

12 amended by inserting ", or the operation of a space sup13 port vehicle," after "or a reentry vehicle". 

14 SEC. 4. EXPERIMENTAL PERMITS FOR SPACE SUPPORT 

15 FLIGHTS. 

16 Section 50906 of title 51, United States Code, is 

17 amended18 (1) by striking subsection (d) and inserting the 

19 following: 

20 "(d) The Secretary may issue a permit only for21 " ( 1) reusable suborbital rockets or reusable 

22 launch vehicles that will be launched into a sub23 orbital trajectory or reentered under that permit 

24 solely forg:\VHLC\031618\031618.Q14.xml 

March 16, 2018 (10:02 a.m.) 

(684698124) 
433 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSV _OOI.XML 

2 

3 

4 

4 

"(A) research and development to test design concepts, equipment, or operating techniques; 

"(B) showing compliance with require5 ments as part of the process for obtaining a li6 cense for launch or reentry under this chapter; 

7 or 

8 "(C) crew training for a launch or reentry 

9 using the design of the rocket or vehicle for 

10 which the permit would be issued; or 

11 "(2) a space support vehicle, or a vehicle that 

12 is in development to become a space support vehicle, 

13 operated by a citizen of the United States for space 

14 support flights that will be conducted under the per15 mit for, or in support of, the purposes described in 

16 subparagraphs (A) through (C) of paragraph (1)."; 

17 and 

18 (2) by striking subsection (h) and inserting the 

19 following: 

20 "(h) No person may, under a permit, operate a reus21 able suborbital rocket, reusable launch vehicle, or space 

22 support vehicle for carrying any property or human being 

23 for compensation or hire.". 

g:\VHLC\031618\031618.o14.xml 

March 16, 2018 (10:02 a.m.) 

(684698124) 
434 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSV _OOl.XML 

5 

1 SEC. 5. COMMUNICATION AND TRANSPARENCY. 

2 Nothing in this Act or the amendments made by this 

3 Act shall be construed to limit the authority of the Sec4 retary of Transportation to discuss potential regulatory 

5 approaches, potential performance standards, or any other 

6 topic related to this Act and the amendments made by 

7 this Act ·with the commercial space industry prior to the 

8 issuance of a notice of proposed rulemaking. 

9 SEC. 6. APPLICABILITY. 

10 (a) IN GENERAL.-'fhe amendments made by this 

11 Act shall take effect on March 1, 2019. 

12 (b) REGULATIONS.-The Secretary of Transportation 

13 may issue such regulations as are necessary to carry out 

14 the amendments made by this Act beginning on the date 

15 of enactment of this Act. 

g:\VHLC\03161 8\03161 8.014.xml 

March 16, 2018 (1 0:02 a.m.) 

(684698124) 
435 

AUTHENTICATED? Us GOVE!INMENT 

INfO!IMATION 

GPO 

115TH CONGRESS H R 5086 2D SESSION 

• • 

To require the Director of the National Science Foundation to develop an 

!-Corps course to support commercialization-ready innovation companies, 

and for other purposes. 

IN TilE IIOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 26, 2018 

Mr. LIPINSKI (for himself and Mr. WEBSTER of Florida) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Science, Space, and 

Technology, and in addition to the Committee on Small Business, for a 

period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To require the Director of the National Science Foundation 

to develop an I-Corps course to support commercialization-ready innovation companies, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Repm~enta2 tives of the United States of Amm·ica in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION I. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Innovators to Entre5 preneurs Act of 2018". 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds the following: 
436 

2 

1 (1) The National Science Foundation Innova2 tion Corps Program (hereinafter referred to as "I3 Corps"), created administratively by the Foundation 

4 in 2011 and statutorily authorized in the American 

5 Innovation and Competitiveness Act, has succeeded 

6 in increasing the commercialization of Government-

? funded research. 

8 (2) !-Corps provides valuable entrepreneurial 

9 education to graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, 

10 and other researchers, providing formal training· for 

11 scientists and engineers to pursue careers in busi12 ness, an increasingly common path for advanced de13 gree holders. 

14 (3) The !-Corps Teams program is successful in 

15 part due to its focus on providing the specific types 

16 of education and mentoring entrepreneurs need 

17 based on the early stage of their companies, however 

18 the progTam does not provide similar support to 

19 them at later stages. 

20 (4) The success of !-Corps in the very early 

21 stages of the innovation continuum should be ex22 paneled upon by offering additional entrepreneurship 

23 training to small businesses as they advance toward 

24 commercialization. 

•HR sos& m 
437 

3 

1 ( 5) The excellent training made available to 

2 grantees of participating agencies through the I3 Corps Program should be made available to all Fed4 eral f,'Tantees as well as other businesses willing to 

5 pay the cost of attending such training. 

6 (6) The success of the !-Corps Program at pro7 moting entrepreneurship within research institutions 

8 and encouraging research commercialization has 

9 been due in part to the National Science Founda10 tion's efforts to date on building a national network 

11 of science entrepreneurs, including convening stake12 holders, promoting national !-Corps courses, cata13 loguing best practices and encourage sharing be14 tween sites and institutions, and developing a menIS tor network. 

16 (7) As the !-Corps Program continues to grow 

17 and expand, the National Science Poundation should 

18 maintain its focus on networking and information 

19 sharing to ensure that innovators across the country 

20 can learn from their peers and remain competitive. 

21 SEC. 3. EXPANDED PARTICIPATION IN I-CORPS. 

22 Section 601(c)(2) of the American Innovation and 

23 Competitiveness Act (42 U.S.C. 1862s-8(c)(2)) is amend24 ed by adding at the end the follo"\\ing: 

25 "(C) ADDITIONAL PARTICIPA."''TS.-

•HR 5086 m 
438 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

•HR soss m 

4 

"(i) EUGIBIUTY.-The Director, m 

consultation with relevant stakeholders, as 

determined by the Director, which may include Federal agencies, I -Corps regional 

nodes, universities, and public and private 

entities engaged in technology transfer or 

commercialization of technologies, shall 

provide an option for participation in an ICorps Teams course by-

"(I) Small Business Innovation 

Research Program grantees; and 

"(II) other entities, as determined appropriate by the Director. 

"(ii) COST OF PARTICIPATION.-The 

cost of participation by a Small Business 

Innovation Research Program grantee in 

such course may be provided-

"(!) through !-Corps Teams 

grants; 

"(II) through funds awarded to 

grantees under the Small Business Innovation Research Program or the 

Small Business Technology Transfer 

Program; 
439 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

5 

"(III) by the grantor Federal 

agency of the grantee using funds set 

aside for the Small Business Innovation Research Program under section 

9(f)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 

u.s.c. 638(f)(1)); 

"(IV) by the grantor Federal 

agency of the grantee using funds set 

aside for the Small Business Technology Transfer Program under section 9 (n) (1) of the Small Business 

Act (15 U.S.C. 638(n)(l)); or 

"(V) by the participating 

teams.". 

15 SEC. 4. I-CORPS COURSE FOR COMMERCIALIZATION-READY 

16 PARTICIPANTS. 

17 (a) I~ GENERAh-In carrying out the !-Corps pro18 gram described in section 601 (c) of the American Innova19 tion and Competitiveness Act (42 U.S.C. 1862s-8(c)), the 

20 Director shall develop an !-Corps course offered by I21 Corps regional nodes to suppmt commercialization-ready 

22 participants. Such course shall include skills such as at23 tracting investors, scaling up a company, and building a 

24 brand. 

•HR 5086 m 
440 

6 

(b) ENGAGEMENT WITH REI,EVAc.'i'"T STAKE2 HOLDERS.-ln developing the course under subsection (a), 

3 the Director may consult ·with the heads of such Federal 

4 agencies, universities, and public and private entities as 

5 the Director determines to be appropriate. 

6 (c) ELIGIBI,E PARTICIPANTS.-The course developed 

7 under subsection (a) shall8 (1) support participants that have completed an 

9 1-Corps Teams course; 

10 (2) support participants that have made the dell cision to take an innovation to market. 

12 SEC. 5. REPORT. 

13 Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment 

14 of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States 

15 shall submit to Congress a report containing an evaluation 

16 of the 1-Corps program described in section 601(c) of the 

17 American Innovation and Competitiveness Act (42 U.S.C. 

18 1862s-8( c)). Such evaluation shall include an assessment 

19 of the effects of 1-Corps on20 (1) the commercialization of I<,ederally funded 

21 research and development; 

22 (2) the higher education system; and 

23 (3) regional economies and the national econ24 omy. 

•HR 50861H 
441 

7 

SEC. 6. FUNDING. 

2 From funds otherwise provided to the National 

3 Science Foundation, a total of $5,000,000 shall be made 

4 available for fiscal years 2019 and 2020 to carry out the 

5 activities described in section 4 and the amendment made 

6 by section 3. 

0 

•HR 5086 IH 
COMMITTEE MARKUPS OF H.R. 1224, 

H.R. 1430, H.R. 1431, H.R. 2105, H.R. 2809, 

H.R. 2763, H.R. 1159, H.R. 4376, H.R. 4377, 

H.R. 4378, H.R. 4375, H.R. 4323, H.R. 4254, 

H.R. 3397, H.R. 4675, H.R. 5345, H.R. 5346, 

H.R. 5086, H.R. 5509, H.R. 5503, H.R. 5905, 

H.R. 5907, H.R. 5906, H.R. 6227, H.R. 6229, 

H.R. 6226, H.R. 6398, S. 141, AND H.R. 6468 

COMPILATION OF MARKUPS 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND 

TECHNOLOGY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST AND SECOND SESSIONS 

2017–2018 

Serial No. CP: 115–1 

Volume 2 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

( 
COMPILATION OF MARKUPS, VOLUME 2 
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

35–710PDF WASHINGTON : 2019

COMMITTEE MARKUPS OF H.R. 1224, 

H.R. 1430, H.R. 1431, H.R. 2105, H.R. 2809, 

H.R. 2763, H.R. 1159, H.R. 4376, H.R. 4377, 

H.R. 4378, H.R. 4375, H.R. 4323, H.R. 4254, 

H.R. 3397, H.R. 4675, H.R. 5345, H.R. 5346, 

H.R. 5086, H.R. 5509, H.R. 5503, H.R. 5905, 

H.R. 5907, H.R. 5906, H.R. 6227, H.R. 6229, 

H.R. 6226, H.R. 6398, S. 141, AND H.R. 6468 

COMPILATION OF MARKUPS 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND 

TECHNOLOGY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST AND SECOND SESSIONS 

2017–2018 

Serial No. CP: 115–1 

Volume 2 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov 
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

HON. LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas, Chair 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

RANDY K. WEBER, Texas 

STEPHEN KNIGHT, California 

BRIAN BABIN, Texas 

BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia 

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia 

RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana 

GARY PALMER, Alabama 

DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida 

ANDY BIGGS, Arizona 

ROGER W. MARSHALL, Kansas 

NEAL P. DUNN, Florida 

CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana 

RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina 

DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

AMI BERA, California 

ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut 

MARC A. VEASEY, Texas 

DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia 

JACKY ROSEN, Nevada 

CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

BILL FOSTER, Illinois 

MARK TAKANO, California 

COLLEEN HANABUSA, Hawaii 

CHARLIE CRIST, Florida 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY

HON. HON. RANDY K. WEBER, Texas, Chair 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

STEPHEN KNIGHT, California 

GARY PALMER, Alabama 

DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida 

NEAL P. DUNN, Florida 

RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina 

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas 

MARC A. VEASEY, Texas 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

JACKY ROSEN, Nevada 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

BILL FOSTER, Illinois 

MARK TAKANO, California 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT

HON. JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma, Chair 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

RANDY WEBER, Texas 

JOHN MOOLENAAR, Michigan 

BRIAN BABIN, Texas 

BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas 

GARY PALMER, Alabama 

RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana 

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

AMI BERA, California 

MARK TAKANO, California 

BILL FOSTER, Illinois 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

(II) 
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT

HON. RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana, Chair 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia 

ROGER W. MARSHALL, Kansas 

CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana 

RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina 

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas 

DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

HON. BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia, Chair 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

STEPHEN KNIGHT, California 

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia 

DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida 

ROGER W. MARSHALL, Kansas 

DEBBIE LESKO, Arizona 

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut 

JACKY ROSEN, Nevada 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

AMI BERA, California 

DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE

HON. BRIAN BABIN, Texas, Chair 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

MO BROOKS, Alabama, 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

STEVE KNIGHT, California 

Brian Babin, Texas 

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas 

DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland 

AMI BERA, California 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado 

MARC A. VEASEY, Texas 

DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

(III)
C O N T E N T S 

2017– 2018 

Page 

H.R. 5509—Innovations in Mentoring, Training, and Apprenticeships Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, April 17, 2018 .... 443 

H.R. 5503—National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization 

Act of 2018 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, April 17, 2018 .... 452 

H.R. 5905—Department of Energy Science and Innovation Act of 2018 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, May 23, 2018 ...... 595 

H.R. 5907—National Innovation Modernization by Laboratory 

Empowerment Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, May 23, 2018 ...... 606 

H.R. 5906—ARPA-E Act of 2018 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, May 23, 2018 ...... 608 

H.R. 6227—National Quantum Initiative Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, June 27, 2018 ..... 687 

H.R. 6229—National Institute of Standards and Technology 

Reauthorization Act of 2018 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, June 27, 2018 ..... 698 

H.R. 6226—American Space SAFE Management Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, June 27, 2018 ..... 704 

H.R. 6398—Department of Energy Veterans’ Health Initiative Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, July 18, 2018 ...... 789 

S. 141—Space Weather Research and Forecasting Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, July 24, 2018 ...... 811 

H.R. 6468—Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act 

Proceedings of the markup held by the Full Committee, July 24, 2018 ...... 835 

(IV) 
(443) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUPS: H.R. 5509, INNOVATIONS 

IN MENTORING, TRAINING, AND 

APPRENTICESHIPS ACT; 

AND H.R. 5503, NATIONAL AERONAUTICS 

AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2018 

TUESDAY, APRIL 17, 2018 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of the Committee at any time. 

Pursuant to Committee rule 2(e) and House rule XI(2)(h)(4), the 

Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes. 

Today, we meet to consider H.R. 5509, the Innovations in Mentoring, Training, and Apprenticeships Act; and H.R. 5503, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 

2018. 

H.R. 5509 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 5509, 

the Innovations in Mentoring, Training, and Apprenticeships Act. 

And the clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 5509, a bill to direct the National Science Foundation to provide grants for research about STEM education approaches and the STEM-related work force and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

And I’ll recognize myself for an opening statement. 

Before I do so, I appreciate the good attendance we have this 

morning, and I want to introduce our newest and youngest member 

of the staff, and that is Mark Marin’s youngest daughter sitting behind me, Alden, almost age 10. And we appreciate Alden’s being 

here. 

And I should warn everybody in the room that if crowd control 

is required, Alden is going to wield the gavel. So we’re happy to 

have her here. 
444 

And again, I’ll go back to my opening statement. 

This morning, the Committee will consider H.R. 5509, the Innovations in Mentoring, Training, and Apprenticeships Act. This legislation was introduced by Majority Leader McCarthy. I and Ranking 

Member Eddie Bernice Johnson have cosponsored this measure, 

and I hope others will, too. 

H.R. 5509 is the product of a hearing held by the Research and 

Technology Subcommittee in February. Members and witnesses 

discussed innovative work force training approaches aimed at 

boosting STEM education and careers in order to meet current and 

future STEM professional and technical work force needs. A special 

thanks to Chairwoman Comstock and Ranking Member Lipinski 

for holding that hearing. 

Meeting our growing work force needs in all areas of science and 

technology is essential for our economic competitiveness. For instance, according to a recent study, there will be a need for 3.5 million skilled manufacturing workers over the next decade. But it is 

anticipated that 2 million of those jobs will go to—go unfilled unless we recruit and educate a whole host of high-skilled manufacturing workers. 

H.R. 5509 continues the bipartisan progress this Committee has 

made to improve and expand science, technology, engineering, and 

mathematics. We extended the program’s educational programs 

and created new pathways to STEM careers. 

Research shows that direct knowledge and hands-on work experience with STEM occupations and opportunities stimulate interests 

in STEM studies and careers among students at every level. To 

this end, H.R. 5509 directs the National Science Foundation to 

fund initiatives that support innovative partnerships between academic institutions and local industries. 

The NSF is to offer at least $5 million per year over the next 4 

years for competitively awarded grants to community colleges to 

develop new STEM courses and degrees. These programs will combine formal education with on-the-job work experiences, such as apprenticeships and internships, by partnering with local employers. 

The bill also requires at least $2.5 million per year over the next 

4 years for the NSF to award research grants to measure student 

outcomes and the effectiveness of computer-based and online 

courses for technical skills training. 

Successful work force development programs extend beyond the 

four walls of classrooms and laboratories. One primary example is 

at Wichita State University, which Mr. Marshall and I visited last 

year. During his testimony, Dr. John Bardo, the President of Wichita State University, discussed the university’s testing of its applied learning initiative. The university found that, on average, 

newly graduated engineers take 2 years to contribute to the bottom 

line for their employers. However, when Wichita State University 

students were given an opportunity to participate in an apprenticeship program prior to graduation, that timeline to profitability was 

cut from 2 years to 6 months. 

The pending legislation directs the NSF to award at least another $2.5 million per year for the next 4 years for universities to 

partner with local employers and offer paid apprenticeships and 

other applied learning experiences to STEM students. 
445 

Not only can we learn from successful programs here in the 

United States, it is also important to examine how other developed 

nations address their skilled technical work force needs. This bill 

directs the NSF to commission research that compares and contrasts skilled technical work force development between the United 

States and other developed nations and to report the results to 

Congress. 

H.R. 5509 requires the National Science Foundation to conduct 

research to improve the efficiency of the skilled technical labor 

markets and examine the skilled technical work force to have a 

clear understanding of work force trends and needs. The Innovations in Mentoring, Training, and Apprenticeships Act, H.R. 5509, 

is a significant step in the right direction toward ensuring the 

United States’ competitiveness in the global economy of today. The 

initiatives in this legislation will leverage the hard work and ingenuity of women and men of all ages, education levels, and backgrounds to grow and meet the demand for a STEM-capable work 

force, so I encourage my colleagues to support this bill. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

This morning the committee will consider H.R. 5509, the Innovations in Mentoring, Training, and Apprenticeships Act. This legislation was introduced by Majority Leader McCarthy. I have cosponsored this measure and I hope others will too. 

H.R. 5509 is the product of a hearing held by the Research and Technology Subcommittee in February. Members and witnesses discussed innovative workforce 

training approaches aimed at boosting STEM education and careers in order to meet 

current and future STEM professional and technical workforce needs. A special 

thanks to Chairwoman Comstock and Ranking Member Lipinski for holding that 

hearing. 

Meeting our growing workforce needs in all areas of science and technology is essential for our economic competitiveness. 

For instance, according to a recent study, there will be a need for 3.5 million 

skilled manufacturing workers over the next decade. But it is anticipated that 2 million of those jobs will go unfilled unless we recruit and educate a whole host of highskilled manufacturing workers. 

H.R. 5509 continues the bipartisan progress this committee has made to improve 

and expand science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education 

programs and create new pathways to STEM careers. 

Research shows that direct knowledge and hands-on work experience with STEM 

occupations and opportunities stimulate interests in STEM studies and careers 

among students at every level. To this end, H.R. 5509 directs the National Science 

Foundation (NSF) to fund initiatives that support innovative partnerships between 

academic institutions and local industries. 

The NSF is to offer at least $5 million per year over the next four years for competitively awarded grants to community colleges to develop new STEM courses and 

degrees. These programs will combine formal education with on-the-job work experiences, such as apprenticeships and internships, by partnering with local employers. The bill also requires at least $2.5 million per year over the next four years for 

the NSF to award research grants to measure student outcomes and the effectiveness of computer-based and online courses for technical skills training. 

Successful workforce development programs extend beyond the four walls of classrooms and laboratories. One primary example is at Wichita State University, which 

Mr. Marshall and I visited last year. 

During his testimony, Dr. John Bardo, the president of Wichita State University, 

discussed the university’s testing of its applied learning initiative. 

The university found that, on average, newly graduated engineers take two years 

to contribute to the bottom line for their employers. However, when Wichita State 

University students were given an opportunity to participate in an apprenticeship 

program prior to graduation, that timeline to profitability was cut to six months. 

The pending legislation directs the NSF to award at least another $2.5 million 

per year for the next four years for universities to partner with local employers and 

offer paid apprenticeships and other applied learning experiences to STEM students. 
446 

Not only can we learn from successful programs here in the United States, it is 

also important to examine how other developed nations address their skilled technical workforce needs. This bill directs the NSF to commission research that compares and contrasts skilled technical workforce development between the United 

States and other developed nations and to report the results to Congress. 

H.R. 5509 requires the NSF to conduct research to improve the efficiency of the 

skilled technical labor markets and examine the skilled technical workforce to have 

a clear understanding of workforce trends and needs. 

The Innovations in Mentoring, Training, and Apprenticeships Act, H.R. 5509, is 

a significant step in the right direction towards ensuring the United States’ competitiveness in the global economy of today. 

The initiatives in this legislation will leverage the hard work and ingenuity of 

women and men of all ages, education levels and backgrounds to grow and meet the 

demand for a STEM-capable workforce. 

I encourage my colleagues to support this bill and I yield back the balance of my 

time. 

Chairman SMITH. And I now recognize the Ranking Member, the 

gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Chairman Smith. Today, 

we are marking up two bills, one good one, and one bad one. H.R. 

5509, the Innovations in Mentoring, Training, and Apprenticeships 

Act, is a good bill, and I support it. 

Research has shown that we are experiencing a significant 

STEM skills gap in this country. Employers are struggling to find 

workers with the technical skills they need. My area is a prime example. One cause for the gap is a lack of coordination between educational institutions and industry. Skills taught in secondary and 

postsecondary schools are not aligned with the skills in high demand by employers. With an economy that is increasingly datadriven and reliant on rapidly evolving technologies, we must ensure our work force can keep pace. 

Apprenticeships are a work force development strategy that enables close coordination between high schools, vocational schools, 

universities, and local employers. Although other nations have enjoyed the benefits of apprenticeships for decades, apprenticeships 

remain unutilized in this country. 

This bill is a positive step in the right direction and is a recognition and endorsement of good work that the National Science Foundation is doing in this area. A strong STEM work force poised to 

take on the challenges of a 21st century economy is vital for continued growth, security, and global competitiveness. 

With regards to H.R. 5509, the Chairman and his staff responded 

positively to suggestions and concerns of the minority and to the 

feedback from the National Science Foundation and modified the 

bill to improve it. I appreciate these efforts, and I support passage 

of this bill. 

I see we also have amendments offered by the gentlelady from 

Oregon that make some improvements to the bill, and I look forward to hearing about those amendments and supporting them. 

Thank you, and I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you Chairman Smith. Today we are marking up two bills- one good and 

one bad. H.R. 5509, the Innovations in Mentoring, Training, and Apprenticeships 

Act is a good bill, and I support it. 

Research has shown that we are experiencing a significant STEM skills gap in 

this country. Employers are struggling to find workers with the technical skills they 
447 

need. One cause for the gap is the lack of coordination between educational institutions and industry. 

Skills taught in secondary and post-secondary schools are not aligned with the 

skills in high demand by employers. With an economy that is increasingly data-driven and reliant on rapidly evolving technologies, we must ensure our workforce can 

keep pace. 

Apprenticeships are a workforce development strategy that enables close coordination between high schools, vocational schools, universities, and local employers. Although other nations have enjoyed the benefits of apprenticeships for decades, apprenticeships remain underutilized in this country. This bill is a positive step in the 

right direction and is a recognition and endorsement of the good work that the National Science Foundation is doing in this area. 

A strong STEM workforce poised to take on the challenges of a 21st century economy is vital for continued growth, security, and global competitiveness. 

With regards to H.R. 5509, the Chairman and his staff responded positively to 

suggestions and concerns of the Minority and to feedback from the National Science 

Foundation, and modified the bill to improve it. I appreciate these efforts, and I support passage of this bill. 

I see we also have amendments offered by the gentlelady from Oregon to make 

some improvements to the bill, and I look forward to supporting those amendments 

as well. 

Thank you, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. We have two amendments on the list, both to be offered by the gentlewoman from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici. The first is well-intended; the second is good. 

And the gentlewoman is recognized to offer the first one. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment 

at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 5509 offered by Ms. Bonamici of 

Oregon, amendment 070. 

Chairman SMITH. And, without objection, the amendment is considered as read and the gentlewoman is recognized to explain her 

amendment. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Our nation has some of the best scientists, programmers, and engineers in the world, but what sets our country apart is innovation, 

the ability to come up with new ideas and find new ways to solve 

problems, and this is especially important in science, technology, 

engineering, and math. 

Over the past several years, educators and employers have seen 

great benefits from integrating arts and design into STEM education, STEAM. STEAM engages more students and makes learning more relevant. Educating both halves of the brain results in 

more creative and innovative students who become members of a 

more creative and innovative work force. 

And in opening remarks, Mr. Chairman, you mentioned looking 

at what other countries are doing. South Korea, for example, is implemented STEAM because they want more creative hands-on 

learning. 

This bill is about improving STEM education, and I’m pleased to 

see that this bill would award competitive grants to community colleges to develop or improve associate degree and certificate programs in STEM fields in response to significant work force demand. This amendment would simply make sure that the National 

Science Foundation can also consider for grants those colleges or 

programs that are using the STEAM approach, which more schools 

and businesses are recognizing as a way to get creativity and inno-
448 

vation in the STEM fields. There is neuroscience research to back 

them up. Integrating arts and design into STEM enhances learning 

and leads to more creativity. Think Leonardo da Vinci. 

STEAM is not a partisan issue. I’m the Co-Chair of the bipartisan congressional STEAM Caucus with Representative Stefanik 

from New York. We’ve been working together to emphasize the importance of arts and design in the education of students in the development of our work force. When we had the STEAM Caucus 

kickoff, for example, the U.S. Patent Office attended. And in fact 

Governor Kasich of Ohio discussed his support for STEAM in his 

2016 State of the State address mentioning that arts are essential 

for success in 21st century careers. And just recently, the U.S. Department of Education hosted—and Secretary DeVos attended—an 

event titled ‘‘Full Steam Ahead: Educational Summit on Science, 

Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics. The Nobel Laureates in sciences are significantly more likely to be engaged in arts 

and design than other scientists. 

Mr. Chairman and colleagues, STEAM prepare students to be 

successful in the modern economy by teaching them the advanced 

skills and creative thinking they will need to address challenges in 

the future. So they will know not only how to answer questions but 

what questions to ask. Maintaining our position as an innovative 

country means continuing to fund groundbreaking research and 

educating a cutting-edge next-generation work force. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I reserve the balance of 

my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici. 

And I’ll recognize myself to speak on the amendment. While I 

understand Ms. Bonamici’s goals, I oppose the amendment. Many 

subjects correspond to or overlap with science, technology, engineering, and math, including art, music, and language. The inclusion of art in STEM, however, would dilute a national effort to 

build a robust technical work force, which remains an urgent national priority. In effect if art is included, where does it end? 

So I oppose the amendment. I appreciate the gentlewoman’s intentions and urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment as well. 

Are there—is there anyone else who wishes to speak on the 

amendment? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman from California, Mr. Rohrabacher. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I would just like to add a thought if we’re 

discussing the education in STEM cell—or STEM education that is. 

Let me just note that there’s some people who are claiming that 

we lack the number of people with skills in order to run our aerospace industry. And I just would like to express for the record that 

I am dismayed to meet so many people who are 50 years old and 

above or have some disability, people who are American citizens 

who are denied work because our major corporations are finding it 

better to try to lobby us to bring in people from overseas to take 

those jobs. 

And I just believe that this whole H–1B visa situation is as— 

really hurting Americans who have contributed so much to our 

country. And when they get to be 50 and they’re laid off because 
449 

the project contract is up and the company then has a new contract, they want to bring on a 25-year-old immigrant from India or 

anywhere else in the planet. And I would hope that we care enough 

about our people who are engaged in making America the technological and space power that we are so proud of, that we care about 

these men, and I just—men and women who are—deserve this. 

And again, also people who have certain disabilities but can get 

the job done are passed over. And I’ve just seen this suffering in 

California, and a lot of these folks are veterans who also were in 

the military even, and they’re just—we are not being true to them 

by bringing—by just saying we’re going to solve the problem by 

bringing people in from overseas. 

I think the idea that we’ve got to focus on education for our own 

people is a good fundamental idea, and I hope that we will find 

ways of working on this in a way that you will be able to support 

that, Mr. Chairman, as well as our—— 

Chairman SMITH. OK. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER [continuing]. Colleagues on the other side of 

the aisle. I just thought I’d put that in the record. Thank you very 

much. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher. 

Is there anyone else who seeks to be recognized? 

Although the gentlewoman from Oregon has already been recognized, we will recognize her without objection again. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I understand you 

do not support this amendment at this time. I hope to continue the 

conversation. I know I didn’t mention that we had a STEAM Caucus briefing with Boeing, Intel, and Lockheed Martin, all talking 

about how they value creativity and innovation. So I hope we can 

find a way to work together to promote a well-rounded work force 

that’s ready to meet the demands of our growing economy in the 

future, and I thank the Chairman and with that ask that my 

amendment be withdrawn. And I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, so ordered and appreciated. 

The gentlewoman is recognized for her second amendment. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment 

at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 5509 offered by Ms. Bonamici of 

Oregon, amendment number 071. 

Chairman SMITH. I spoke out of order. I should’ve said that the 

amendment should be reported. Without objection, the amendment 

will be considered, and the gentlewoman from Oregon is recognized 

to explain this amendment. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I hear from many Oregonians, and I know you hear from your 

constituents as well, who feel left behind and left out of the economic recovery. Too many people are still struggling to make ends 

meet. There may be job openings in their community, but the jobs 

require skills and resources they don’t have, creating a skills gap 

that leaves businesses struggling to find workers with the skills 

and workers without pathways to better-paying jobs. We need to 
450 

strengthen investments in work-based learning programs that respond to local industry needs. 

For example, in northwest Oregon, the Oregon Manufacturing 

Innovations Center, or OMIC, is bringing together industry leaders 

like Boeing with educational institutions such as Oregon Tech, Oregon State University, Portland State University, and Portland 

Community College to develop work-based learning programs. This 

collaboration will result in growth and efficiency in advanced manufacturing and a more skilled workplace—workforce in the community. Through stronger investments and work-based learning, we 

can build pathways to get more people back to work and provide 

our Nation’s businesses with the work force that will improve productivity and efficiency. 

To help Oregonians and many other Americans who still face job 

insecurity, we should expand work-based learning to sectors of the 

economy that lack established apprenticeship programs including 

in the STEM fields or STEAM fields. One way to support these 

new apprenticeships is through the establishment of industry partnerships which bring together employers, education institutions, 

training providers, and community-based organizations to support 

the creation and expansion of work-based learning programs. 

I’m glad this bill will direct the National Science Foundation to 

provide grants to universities to develop or improve apprenticeships for students enrolled in STEM fields where there is significant work force demand. My amendment would allow universities 

or community colleges to engage with industry and sector partnerships in the grant application process. Industry partnerships have 

proven to be a successful model since the enactment of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act and can help employers that 

would otherwise lack the resources to establish apprenticeships. 

The inclusion of industry partnerships in this bill would encourage 

continuity in State and local strategies to address skills shortages. 

I urge colleagues to support this amendment, and I yield back 

the balance of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici. And I’ll recognize 

myself in support of the amendment. First of all, I want to thank 

Ms. Bonamici and her staff for working with us on this amendment. The competitive grants in this bill are intended to spur innovative research through STEM partnerships between academia and 

industry. This amendment reinforces the desire to provide NSF 

with the flexibility needed to fund strong partnerships between 

local and regional employers and academia to experiment with applied learning opportunities. So I support the amendment and encourage my colleagues to do the same. 

Are there any other Members who wish to be recognized on this 

amendment? 

The gentlewoman, the Ranking Member, Ms. Johnson is recognized and then Mr. Lipinski. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the 

last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I want to thank Ms. Bonamici for offering this 

amendment to expand the potential pool of partners in developing 

apprenticeship programs to include industry or sector partnerships. 
451 

By incorporating the structure established in the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, this amendment provides clarity to grant 

proposers collaborating with local and State work force development boards, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. 

I thank you and yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

The gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Lipinski, is recognized. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to thank Ms. Bonamici for her amendment to help 

strengthen this important bill, and I’m proud to cosponsor this bill. 

It’s very important that we do more to promote the development of 

our STEM technical work force. And the program at the NSF to 

help do this has been very important, and it’s very good that we 

make sure we prioritize this moving forward. 

I’m an ardent supporter of STEM education with two degrees I 

have in engineering. I’ve also been a very strong supporter of apprenticeships. We need to see expansion of apprenticeships in our 

work force to really help to teach the skills that are required for 

today’s jobs. 

A recent hearing in this Committee, we heard testimony from a 

witness from Moraine Valley Community College, which is in my 

district, and Moraine Valley runs a program that prepares students 

for careers in cybersecurity, something that would—this bill would 

help to do and to help expand such programs. 

I think it’s very important that—for the jobs that are out there 

today that we need more skilled employees for that. Apprenticeships certainly help significantly. And I think this program at the 

NSF which would help strengthen the STEM technical work force 

is going to be very significant. 

I would like to have seen an increase in funding for this program 

which this bill does not provide, but this bill is a step in the right 

direction. I want to thank our Representatives Smith and Marshall 

for their work on this bill, and I urge all my colleagues to support 

it. 

And I’ll yield to Mr. Perlmutter. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. And thank you, Mr. Lipinski. You’ll have the 

opportunity on the next bill for STEM education grants to add $8 

million, so I just want to let you know that we’re going to authorize 

hopefully $8 million for STEM grants out of the space program. 

And with that, I yield back. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. And reclaiming my time, great idea, Mr. 

Perlmutter, and will support that. I’ll yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski. A little advance advertisement by Mr. Perlmutter. 

Is there any further discussion on the amendment? 

If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment. 

All in favor, say aye. 

All opposed, nay. 

The amendment is agreed to. 

If there is no—if there are no further amendments, a reporting 

quorum being present, I move that the Committee on Science, 

Space, and Technology report H.R. 5509 to the House, as amended, 

with a recommendation that the bill be approved. 
452 

Question is on favorably reporting H.R. 5509 to the House, as 

amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

H.R. 5509 is ordered reported to the House. I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any necessary technical and 

conforming changes, and without objection, so ordered. 

Let me say to Members that there are ongoing negotiations on 

the NASA bill, and in order to conclude those discussions, we’re 

going to take a 5-minute recess and then we will reconvene. So if 

Members will stay really close by—in fact, you don’t need to leave 

your seats at all. But we’ll be back with a NASA bill in about 5 

minutes. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman SMITH. Let me just say to my colleagues that we are 

still waiting to hear from the minority as to what their final response is going to be, and we have told them that we expect to reconvey at 11 o’clock, so our 5 minutes is going to 15. But we hope 

to start again at 11. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman, now that you have—we have 

a little extra time, I wonder if you have some stories about the 

great State of Texas that you could share with us. 

Mr. WEBER. Dana, I’ve got one for you if you want one. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. The gentleman from Texas is recognized, 

but I’m a little worried as the—— 

Mr. WEBER. Dana, Texas is so big that it was said that back during the covered-wagon days when the pioneers were coming West, 

if one entered Texas from Louisiana and a baby was born on that 

day, by the time they got to El Paso, he was in the first grade. 

[Recess.] 

H.R. 5503 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 5503, 

the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization 

Act of 2018. The clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 5503, to authorize the programs of the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration for fiscal years 2018 and 

2019 and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. And I’ll recognize myself for an opening statement. 

The NASA Authorization Act of 2018 is a crucial step in continuing the greatness of American space exploration. The act ensures that NASA will focus on its priority missions, leverage private sector partnerships and entrepreneurship, and continue space 

research that will launch America toward new scientific discoveries 

and worlds. NASA’s funding amounts to $20.74 billion or 1/2 of 1 

percent of the Federal budget. 

Consistent with the core policy tenants of the President’s budget 

request, the 2018 NASA Authorization Act maintains a balanced 

portfolio across a broad array of NASA priority programs and ini-
453 

tiatives. It funds deep space exploration systems above the President’s request to expedite the Space Launch System and Orion 

Spacecraft. It funds science above the President’s budget request to 

allow NASA to move forward with a number of programs, including 

a Mars sample return mission and Europa exploration. 

The Committee has ongoing concerns that NASA has been given 

responsibility for earth science activities that compete for funding 

with NASA’s core functions in space exploration and aeronautics. 

A good example is Landsat. In the past, both United States Geological Survey and NOAA have been responsible for development 

and operation of Landsat satellites. But now, NASA is responsible 

for mission and development activities, including Landsat 9, along 

with an activity to design and build a full-capability Landsat 10 

satellite. 

In the omnibus appropriation bill, 11 of the 12 other agencies 

conducting earth science research received budget increases, such 

as NOAA, DOE, United States Geological Survey, Agriculture, 

EPA, NSF, the Smithsonian, DOT, HHS, DOD, and even the 

United States Agency for International Development. However, 

NASA has, for too long, conducted earth science work for the benefit of other agencies without reimbursement. 

To make certain NASA’s funding authorization is truly focused 

on space exploration and aeronautics, this act aligns funding accordingly and directs reimbursement to NASA for earth science 

work undertaken for the benefit of other agencies. This reimbursement directive serves to offset NASA funding reductions in earth 

science relative to the President’s budget request. However, earth 

science still receives $1.45 billion, or 7 percent of NASA’s entire 

budget. The act supports the President’s proposal to restructure 

and increase funding for NASA’s space technology programs to better align to NASA human and robotic exploration needs. This is a 

good step forward for NASA. 

As a critical component to NASA’s exploration agenda, for too 

long, space technology investments lacked the focus and attention 

they deserve. The act includes a number of provisions increasing 

transparency into NASA’s management of major programs and ensuring that contractors are held responsible for poor performance. 

Just 3 weeks ago, Congress was notified that the James Webb 

Space Telescope is delayed yet again. In fact, it has been delayed 

no less than three times, originally scheduled for launch in 2007, 

then 2014, then 2018, and now for 2020. And the cost has increased from $1 billion to $8 billion. While this Committee supports 

JWST, NASA and its contractors must be held accountable. 

The Committee looks forward to the Independent Review Board’s 

report this summer, which will determine the revised cost estimate 

for the program and help define a way forward for this space telescope program. 

That brings me to the Wide Field Infrared Space Telescope, 

WFIRST. This Committee has consistently supported it, but the recent cost growth and independent review team findings are similar 

to problems incurred on JWST. The act strikes a balance, capping 

spending if WFIRST moves forward and providing a set-aside in 

Fiscal Year 2019 of $180 million to address justified recommendations of the JWST and WFIRST program reviews that are pending. 
454 

We have explored near-Earth object defense at Committee hearings. The Administration prioritized this mission and requested 

$150 million for NASA’s Planetary Defense program. NASA must 

complete its NEO survey. Supporting projects such as the 

NEOCam mission could go a long way to accomplishing this task. 

Testimony before this Committee has also highlighted that we 

are on the verge of a breakthrough in the search for life that could 

change the way humanity views its place in the universe. In the 

2017 NASA Transition Authorization Act, NASA was given a new 

statutory directive for NASA to, quote, ‘‘search for life’s origin, evolution, distribution, and future in the universe.’’ This act directs 

and authorizes funds to achieve that purpose. 

It was my hope that today we would have a bipartisan markup. 

In fact, discussions have been ongoing for weeks and a draft bill 

text was exchanged 3 weeks ago. An offer was made, and rejected, 

to fund earth science at the NASA-requested or omnibus levels, 

though I expect that to continue to be discussed shortly. 

The United States has led the world in space exploration for 50 

years, and we must ensure that the United States continues to do 

so for the next 50 years. We must also continue to invest in NASA 

as the only American agency responsible for space exploration. 

I want to thank Chairman Babin for introducing this bill. It redoubles our commitment to U.S. leadership in space for decades to 

come. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

The NASA Authorization Act of 2018 is a crucial step in continuing the greatness 

of American space exploration. 

The act ensures that NASA will focus on its priority missions, leverage private 

sector partnerships and entrepreneurship and continue space research that will 

launch America toward new scientific discoveries and worlds. NASA’s funding 

amounts to $20.74 billion or one-half of one percent of the federal budget. 

Consistent with the core policy tenants of the president’s budget request, the 2018 

NASA Authorization act maintains a balanced portfolio across a broad array of 

NASA priority programs and initiatives. 

It funds deep space exploration systems above the president’s request to expedite 

the Space Launch System and Orion Spacecraft. 

It funds science above the president’s budget request to allow NASA to move forward with a number of programs including a Mars Sample Return Mission and Europa exploration. 

The committee has ongoing concerns that NASA has been given responsibility for 

Earth science activities that compete for funding with NASA’s core functions in 

space exploration and aeronautics. A good example is Landsat. In the past both 

USGS and NOAA have been responsible for development and operation of Landsat 

satellites. 

But now, NASA is responsible for mission and development activities, including 

Landsat 9, along with an activity to design and build a full-capability Landsat 10 

satellite. 

In the omnibus appropriation bill, 11 of the 12 other agencies conducting Earth 

science research received budget increases, such as: NOAA; DOE; United States Geological Survey; Agriculture; EPA; NSF; the Smithsonian; DOT; HHS; DoD; and 

even the United States Agency for International Development. However, NASA has, 

for too long, conducted Earth science work for the benefit of other agencies without 

reimbursement. 

To make certain NASA’s funding authorization is truly focused on space exploration and aeronautics, this act aligns funding accordingly and directs reimbursement to NASA for Earth science work undertaken for the benefit of other agencies. 

This reimbursement directive serves to offset NASA funding reductions in Earth 

science relative to the president’s budget request. However, Earth science still receives $1.45 billion, or seven percent of NASA’s entire budget. 
455 

The act supports the president’s proposal to restructure and increase funding for 

NASA’s space technology programs to better align to NASA human and robotic exploration needs. This is a good step forward for NASA. As a critical component to 

NASA’s exploration agenda, for too long space technology investments lacked the 

focus and attention they deserve. 

The act includes a number of provisions increasing transparency into NASA’s 

management of major programs and ensuring that contractors are held responsible 

for poor performance. 

Just three weeks ago, Congress was notified that the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is delayed yet again. In fact, it has been delayed no less than three 

times, originally scheduled for launch in 2007, then 2014, then 2018 and now for 

2020. And the cost has increased from $1 billion to $8 billion. 

While this committee supports JWST, NASA and its contractors must be held accountable. 

The committee looks forward to the Independent Review Board’s report this summer, which will determine the revised cost-estimate for the program and help define 

a way forward for this space telescope program. 

That brings me to the Wide Field Infrared Space Telescope (WFIRST). This committee has consistently supported WFIRST, but the recent cost growth and independent review team findings are similar to problems incurred on JWST. The act 

strikes a balance, capping spending if WFIRST moves forward and providing a setaside in FY19 of $180 million to address justified recommendations of the JWST 

and WFIRST program reviews that are pending. 

We have explored Near-Earth Object (NEO) defense at committee hearings. The administration prioritized this mission and requested $150 million for NASA’s Planetary Defense program. NASA must complete its NEO survey. Supporting projects 

such as the NEOCam mission could go a long way to accomplishing this task. 

Testimony before this committee has also highlighted that we are on the verge 

of a breakthrough in the search for life that could change the way humanity views 

its place in the universe. In the 2017 NASA Transition Authorization Act, NASA 

was given a new statutory directive for NASA to ‘‘search for life’s origin, evolution, 

distribution, and future in the universe.’’ This act directs and authorizes funds to 

achieve that purpose. 

It was my hope that today we would have a bipartisan markup. In fact, discussions have been ongoing for weeks and draft bill text was exchanged three weeks 

ago. An offer was made, and rejected, to fund Earth Science at the NASA-requested 

or omnibus levels. Though I expect that to continue to be discussed today. 

The U.S. has led the world in space exploration for 50 years, and we must ensure 

that the U.S. continues to do so for the next 50 years. We must also continue to 

invest in NASA as the only American agency responsible for space exploration. 

I thank Chairman Babin for introducing this bill. It redoubles our commitment 

to U.S. leadership in space for decades to come. 

Before I close, I want to thank the committee staff who have devoted so much 

time and effort for months, including this past weekend - I know we were all there 

on Sunday, for example, and Saturday - to negotiate and perfect this bill. They are 

Mike Mineiro, Ryan Faith, Sam Amber, Sara Ratliff, Molly Fromm, Tom Connally, 

and recently departed for active Naval duty, Tom Hammond, as well as Chairman 

Babin’s staffer Steve Janushkowsky. Thank you all. 

I strongly recommend this bill and urge my colleagues to actively support it. 

Chairman SMITH. I’ll now recognize the Ranking Member, the 

gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson, for her opening statement. 

Oh, and before I close, I’d like to add one more thing. Excuse me, 

Ms. Johnson. I want to thank the Committee staff who have devoted so much time and effort for months, including this past weekend—I know we were all there on Sunday, for example, and Saturday—to negotiate a perfect—this bill. They are Mike Mineiro, Ryan 

Faith, Sam Amber, Sara Ratliff, Molly Fromm, Tom Connally, and 

the recently departed for active Naval duty, Tom Hammond, as 

well as Chairman Babin’s staff Steve Janushkowsky. Thank you all 

for the long-time effort, for the many hours, and for working over 

this last weekend. 

I strongly support the bill and I urge my colleagues to support 

it as well. And that concludes my opening statement, and the 

Ranking Member is recognized for hers. 
456 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Unlike the last bill we considered, this bill, H.R. 5503, is deeply 

flawed, and the process that got us to this moment was just as 

flawed, as I will explain. First, this bill slashes funding for earth 

science by a half-billion dollars in Fiscal Year 2019, a quarter of 

the total earth science budget. These cuts are simply another manifestation of the majority’s continued war on climate science. 

However, these reckless cuts are so deep that they will likely 

threaten more than just climate science at NASA. The earth 

science budget supports numerous programs that help Americans 

from aiding farmers to saving American lives and natural disaster 

response, and all of us must know what natural disaster has been 

like recently. 

Where all of this money—where does all of this money go? The 

majority diverts it to searching for space aliens and to the President’s unexamined initiative to build an orbiting moon base, among 

other things. I really wish this was a joke. The majority slashes 

funding for programs that help humans here on earth and instead 

prioritizes spending money to find space aliens. 

Let me be clear. I think the search for life in the universe is a 

fascinating quest, and I’m also a strong supporter of exploration, 

but I think melting ice caps, rising sea levels, the increases in extreme weather events and droughts, and the other serious manifestations of climate change here on earth are also things we 

should be concerned about and studying. 

I don’t have time today to discuss all the issues with this bill because there really are many. I would just note that the bill endorses President Trump’s exploration priorities and plans without 

the Committee having had a single hearing to review it. It directs 

NASA to follow the ISS transition plan before Committee Members 

have even had any opportunity to review it in depth or hear from 

stakeholders. I could go on with other examples, but I think you 

get the point. 

As problematic as the substance of this bill is, the process that 

brought us here today is just as problematic. The majority’s staff 

began discussing this legislation with minority a couple of weeks 

ago. They first provided minority staff with an early draft 2 weeks 

ago. 

A significantly different version was provided to the minority on 

April the 12th. It came with an ultimatum. In essence, if I didn’t 

agree to support the bill as written, then the Chairman would notice the markup on April the 13th with a very different punitive 

version of the bill. And that’s what’s happened, just as Members 

were leaving town for the weekend. I really don’t think vindictiveness is a good basis for legislating. 

I also don’t think it is very effective in the long run. I don’t think 

it is very effective, especially for professionals that have the confidence of the public to look out for their common good. But the reality is we are now marking up a partisan bill that has been 

rushed to markup with childish ultimatums and arbitrary deadlines in the process, disenfranchising Members on both sides of the 

aisle from being able to conduct the oversight in hearings that one 

of our Committee’s most significant agencies warrant. There is no 
457 

way to legislate for an agency that accounts for fully 1/2 of the total 

dollars that our Committee authorizes. 

It has needlessly injected partisanship in our Nation’s space program yet again. That doesn’t help NASA, nor does it help us. Instead, it ultimately winds up weakening the widespread bipartisan 

support NASA has traditionally enjoyed, and it certainly diminishes the standing of this Committee. 

I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you Chairman Smith. Unlike the last bill we considered, this bill, H.R. 

5503, is deeply flawed, and the process that got us to this moment was just as 

flawed, as I will explain. 

First, this bill slashes funding for Earth Science by half a billion dollars in FY 

19-a quarter of the total Earth Science budget. These cuts are simply another manifestation of the Majority’s continued war on climate science. 

However, these reckless cuts are so deep that they will likely threaten more than 

just climate science at NASA. The Earth Science budget supports numerous programs that help Americans, from aiding farmers to saving American lives in natural 

disaster response. 

Where does all this money go? The Majority diverts it to searching for space 

aliens and to the President’s unexamined initiative to build an orbiting moon base, 

among other things. I wish I were joking. 

The Majority slashes funding for programs that help humans here on Earth, and 

instead prioritizes spending money to find space aliens. 

Let me be clear: I think the search for life in the universe is a fascinating quest, 

and I’m also a strong supporter of Exploration. But I think melting ice caps, rising 

sea levels, the increases in extreme weather events and drought, and the other serious manifestations of climate change here on Earth are also things we should be 

concerned about and studying. 

I don’t have time today to discuss all the issues with this bill, and there are many. 

I would just note that the bill endorses President Trump’s Exploration priorities and 

plans without the Committee having had a single hearing to review them. 

It directs NASA to follow the ISS Transition Plan before Committee Members 

have even had any opportunity to review it in depth or hear from stakeholders. I 

could go on with other examples, but I think you get my point. 

As problematic as the substance of the bill is, the process that brought us here 

today is just as problematic. The Majority staff began discussing this legislation 

with the Minority a couple of weeks ago. They first provided Minority staff with an 

early draft two weeks ago. A significantly different version was provided to the Minority on April 12th. It came with an ultimatum: In essence, if I didn’t agree to support the bill as written, then the Chairman would notice the markup on April 13th 

with a different, punitive version of the bill. 

And that’s what happened, just as Members were leaving town for the weekend. 

I really don’t think vindictiveness is a good basis for legislating. I also don’t think 

it is very effective in the long run. But the reality is we are now marking up a partisan bill that has been rushed to markup with childish ultimatums and arbitrary 

deadlines-in the process, disenfranchising Members on both sides of the aisle from 

being able to conduct the oversight and hearings that one of our Committee’s most 

significant agencies warrants. 

This is no way to legislate for an agency that accounts for fully one half of the 

total dollars our Committee authorizes. 

It has needlessly injected partisanship into our Nation’s space program, yet again. 

That doesn’t help NASA. Instead, it ultimately winds up weakening the widespread 

bipartisan support NASA has traditionally enjoyed, and it certainly diminishes the 

standing of this Committee. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. I’m going to recognize myself for a minute to respond and—so that all Members 

know at least how I see the process. 

For several weeks going back to mid-March long before a draft 

bill was complete, my staff had been in discussion with their minority counterparts regarding the NASA authorization markup. 
458 

Text was formally transmitted to minority staff on Monday, April 

2. On April 3 and April 4, 2 weeks ago, majority staff met with 

their minority counterparts for more than 5 hours to walk through 

the bill and answer questions. Indeed, several suggestions made 

during these discussions with minority staff were incorporated into 

the bill. 

Originally, this markup was scheduled for April 12, and majority 

and minority staff were working toward this date. The decision was 

made to postpone the markup to today, April 17, in order to allow 

staff more time to work on the bill at the minority’ request. 

On April 11, a formal offer was made for a bipartisan bill with 

higher levels for the earth science account. On April 12, the most 

up-to-date version to the policy provisions of the bill were transmitted to minority staff literally within seconds after we received 

it. Majority staff offered to discuss the bill and the offer at the minority’s convenience. The offer was never accepted. 

The majority staff in my view has acted in good faith and been 

in discussions of the bill with the minority on a regular basis for 

weeks. 

I’ll now recognize the gentleman from Texas, the Chairman of 

the Space Subcommittee, Mr. Brian Babin. 

Mr. BABIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It’s an honor and a privilege to bring the NASA 2018 authorization to this Committee 

today. 

Just over a year ago, the 2017 National Transition Authorization 

Act was signed into law, representing a clear bipartisan commitment to our Nation’s space program. That law established and this 

bill continues to honor three very important provisions: Continuity 

of purpose, clear long-term goals for exploration, and a balanced 

space science portfolio. NASA must stay the course on future exploration while preserving our advancements in low Earth orbit. 

The first urgent question is the future of the International Space 

Station. The ISS is the jewel in the crown of America’s space program. As a representative of the hardworking men and women of 

Johnson Space Center, I know how important the ISS is to our Nation. 

The Administration, in response to congressional direction in 

2017, has provided a proposal for ISS transition. It is too early to 

say how or when the transition will occur, but the recent report 

outlines a credible course of action and early initial steps. I support 

the Administration carrying out these first steps, but it is critically 

important that we see a more detailed plan before steps are taken 

to sunset the ISS. 

The bill directs NASA to continue the operation of the ISS for 

such time as Congress authorizes. It prevents the Administration 

from pursuing any international agreements that would tie the 

hands of future Congresses. The Administrator must report directly 

to this Committee every 3 months on the status of the ISS transition. In other words, the ISS must be transitioned but not before 

we as a nation are ready to do so. 

This bill provides funding for the SLS and Orion programs at 

omnibus levels, signaling that we will support the programs as 

they move toward realization. It also explicitly authorizes and di-
459 

rects the development of a second mobile launch platform to increase safety, reduce delays, and provide flexibility for exploration. 

These and other measures provide a strong foundation, fostering 

a whole-of-government, indeed, a whole-of-nation approach to 

space. As Vice President Pence said yesterday, space exploration is 

essential to our national security, it’s essential to our Nation’s prosperity, and it is essential to the very character of America. 

I have and continue to support the idea of a balanced space program. We must also understand that balanced means not only balanced within NASA but also balanced across government. 

Within the proposed authorization levels, NASA’s science portfolio is 30 percent of NASA’s budget. This is consistent with both 

the omnibus and the President’s budget request. In planetary 

science, this bill increases spending from the kind of science that 

only NASA can do and for which NASA is the first and perhaps 

the only customer such as Mars sample return and missions to Europa. In a responsible way, earth science is correspondingly reduced. 

The Administration is directed to provide NASA reimbursement 

for work undertaken for the benefit of other agencies such as the 

development of particular earth science systems. This will allow 

NASA—continuing working on missions like Landsat without undermining its exploration mission. 

NASA fills an essential and irreplaceable role for our country. It 

is the only agency to send humans to the surface of another celestial body, to send spacecraft to every planet in the solar system, 

and to send probes into interstellar space. 

I want to thank Chairman Smith for his leadership and guidance 

in reaffirming our national commitment to the exploration and use 

of space. I strongly recommend this bill and urge my colleagues to 

actively support it. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. BABIN

It is an honor and a privilege to bring the NASA 2018 Authorization to this committee today. 

Just over a year ago, the 2017 NASA Transition Authorization Act was signed into 

law, representing a clear bipartisan commitment to our nation’s space program. 

That law established and this bill continues to honor three very important provisions: Continuity of purpose, clear long-term goals for exploration and a balanced 

space science portfolio. NASA must stay the course on future exploration while preserving our advancements in low-Earth orbit. 

The first urgent question is the future of the International Space Station (ISS). 

The ISS is the jewel in the crown of America’s space program. As a representative 

of the hard working men and women of Johnson Space Center, I know how important the ISS is to our nation. 

The administration, in response to congressional direction in 2017, has provided 

a proposal for ISS transition. It is too early to say how or when the transition will 

occur but the recent report outlines a credible course of action and early initial 

steps. I support the administration in carrying out first steps. I support the administration carrying out these first steps but it is critically important that we see a 

more detailed plan before steps are taken to sunset ISS. 

The bill directs NASA to continue the operation of the ISS for such time as Congress authorizes. It prevents the administration from pursuing any international 

agreements that would tie the hands of a future Congress. The administrator must 

report directly to this committee every three months on the status of the ISS transition. In other words, the ISS must be transitioned, but not before we, as a nation, 

are ready to do so. 

This bill provides funding for the SLS and Orion programs at omnibus levels, signaling that we will support the programs as they move towards realization. It also 
460 

explicitly authorizes and directs development of a second mobile launch platform to 

increase safety, reduce delays and provide flexibility for exploration. 

These and other measures provide a strong foundation, fostering a wholeofgovernment, indeed, whole-of-nation approach to space. As Vice President Pence 

said yesterday: ‘‘Space exploration is essential to our national security, it’s essential 

to our nation’s prosperity, and it is essential to the very character of America.’’ 

I have and continue to support the idea of a balanced space program. We must 

also understand that ‘‘balanced’’ means not only balanced within NASA but also balanced across government. 

Within the proposed authorization levels, NASA’s science portfolio is 30 percent 

of NASA’s budget. This is consistent with both the omnibus and the president’s 

budget request. 

In Planetary Science, this bill increases spending for the kind of science that only 

NASA can do and for which NASA is the first, and perhaps only, customer, such 

as Mars Sample Return and missions to Europa. 

In a responsible way, Earth science is correspondingly reduced. The administration is directed to provide NASA reimbursement for work undertaken for the benefit 

of other agencies, such as the development of particular Earth science systems. This 

will allow NASA to continuing working on missions like Landsat without undermining its exploration mission. 

NASA fills an essential and irreplaceable role for our country. It is the only agency to send humans to the surface of another celestial body, to send spacecraft to 

every planet in the solar system and to send probes to interstellar space. 

I thank Chairman Smith for his leadership and guidance in reaffirming our national commitment to the exploration and use of space. 

I strongly recommend this bill and urge my colleagues to actively support it. 

Before I yield back to the Chairman, without of objection, I’d like to place the following letters and statements of support in the record, from a number of organizations including: 

• Aerospace Industries Association 

• American Society for Gravitational and Space Research 

• Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy 

• Astrobotic 

• Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership 

• Boeing 

• Commercial Spaceflight Federation 

• Made in Space 

• Moon Express 

• Nanoracks 

• National Space Grant Alliance 

• Texas A&M University System 

• Vector Space Systems 

• Virginia Commercial Spaceflight Authority 

• Space Florida 

Mr. BABIN. And before I yield back to the Chairman, without an 

objection, I’d like to place the following letters and statements of 

support in the record from a number of organizations, including the 

Aerospace Industries Association, American Society for Gravitational and Space Research, Association of Universities for Research 

and Astronomy, Astrobotic, Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership, Boeing, Commercial Spaceflight Federation, Made in Space, 

Moon Express, NanoRacks, National Space Grant Alliance, Texas 

A&M University System, Vector Space Systems, Virginia Commercial Spaceflight Authority, and Space Florida. I request to enter 

these 15 letters and statements into the record without objection. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, that list of individuals, organizations, companies, and stakeholders who endorse the bill will 

be made a part of the record. 
461 

AlA Welcomes NASA Authorization Bill 

Arlington, Va. The Aerospace Industries Association welcomes the introduction of the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Act of2018. The bill authorizes NASA 

operations through Fiscal Year 2019 (FY19) and provides important policy direction for America's 

space endeavors, allowing government and industry to engage in the longer-term planning 

necessary to realize our vision. 

"NASA programs are truly inspirational, both for people working in our industry today and 

the rocket scientists and aerospace engineers of tomorrow," said AlA President and CEO Eric 

Fanning. "It's an exciting time of growth and change in the space community and we are 

encouraged by the national attention that space is receiving." 

NASA programs supporting civil, commercial and national security applications are at the 

center of American achievement and innovation and support tens of thousands of high-paying jobs 

in the space industrial base. The NASA authorization bill demonstrates Congress' continued 

commitment to U.S. leadership and superiority in space through FY19. 

"Space plays a vital role in U.S. national security and economic prosperity," Fanning added. 

"We are interested in learning more about Congress' priorities for NASA through tomorrow's full 

Science Committee mark-up of the bill and to working with the House and Senate to ensure its 

eventual passage." 

CONTACT: Dan Stohr 

(703) 358-1078 office 

(703) 517-8173 mobile 

dan.stohr@aia-aerospace.org 

### 
462 

American Society for Gravitational and Space Research 

April 16, 2018 

Chairman Lamar Smith 

House Science Committee 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

www.asgsr.org 

Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson 

House Science Committee 

394 Ford House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Bernice Johnson: 

The American Society for Gravitational and Space Research (ASGSR), founded in 1984, brings together a 

diverse group of scientists, engineers and students from academia, government and industry to promote 

microgravity research, education, training and development in the areas of space biology and physical 

sciences. The knowledge gained leads to a better understanding of the effects of gravity on living and 

physical systems on Earth and enables human space exploration. 

The American Society for Gravitational and Space Research is writing in support of the proposed NASA 

re-authorization for FY18 and FY19. We are particularly supportive of statements in the bill that 

express support for microgravity research in the context of the International Space Station (ISS) 

mission Section 202 (a)(2). We also want to express support of the manager's amendment that inserts 

the following on page 10, after line 19 

"(3) In addition to the priorities under paragraph (2), the United States has a larger and broader need 

and use for further microgravity research. 

We also appreciate the recognition by the committee that the ISS transition is an evolving process and 

Congress will remain very engaged on the progress, changes and developments to carrying out the 

plans in the ISS transition report. 

Thank you for your commitment and recognition of the need for microgravity research as part of a 

broader national research and innovation agenda. 

Sincerely, 

~7~ 17Ja:i.i.-f3.L!Y.~X'a....J 

Cynthia Martin-Brennan 

Executive Director 

Copies to: The Honorable Brian Babin 

Chair, Space Subcommittee 

United States House of Representatives 

Anna-Usa Paul, Ph.D. 

President 

The Honorable Ami Bera, 

Ranking Member, Space Subcommittee 

United States House of Representatives 
463 

ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITIES FOR RESEARCH IN ASTRONOMY, INC. 

AURA~ 

Su~e 1475 

1331 Pennsylvania Avenue NW 

Washington, DC 20004 

TEL: 202-483-2101 

FAX: 202-483-2106 

OPERATING FOR THE 

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 

Gemini Observatory 

La Serena, Chile & Hilo, Hawai'i 

Large Synoptic Survey Telescope 

Tucson, Arizona & La Serena, Chile 

National Optical Astronomy Observatory 

Tucson, Arizona & La Serena, Chile 

National Solar Observatory 

Boulder, Colorado & Maui, Hawai'i 

Sunspot, New Mexico & Tucson, Arizona 

OPERATING FOR THE NA TlONAL AERONAUTICS 

AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

Space Telescope Science Institute 

Baltimore, Maryland 

MEMBERS/SINCE: 

Boston University 1993 

California Institute of Technology 1972 

Carnegie Institution of Washington 1997 

Carnegie Menon University 2017 

Cornell University 2016 

Fisk University 2010 

Georgia State University 2008 

Harvard University 1957 

Indiana University 1957 

Iowa State University 1992 

Johns Hopkins University 1982 

Kiepenheuer-lnstitut fiir Sonnenphysik 2016 

Massachusetts Institute of Technology 1981 

Michigan Stata Unive~ity 1997 

Montana State Unive~ity 2005 

New Jersey Institute of Technology 2010 

New Mexico State University 1999 

Ohio State Unive~ity 1957 

Pennsylvania State University 1990 

Pontl1icla Universidad Cat61ica de Chile 1997 

Princeton University 1959 

Rutgers University 1999 

Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory 2017 

Stanrord University 2012 

Stony Brook Univen>ity 1986 

Swinburne Umversity 2008 

Te~s A & M University 2014 

Tohoku University 2010 

Universlded de Chile 1992 

University of Arizona 1972 

University of Ce!OOmla Berkeley 2007 

University of Ca!1fomia Santa Cruz 1957 

University of Chicago 1957 

University of Colorado 1977 

University of Florida 2002 

University of Hawaii 1978 

University of Illinois 1980 

University of Maryland 1986 

University of Michigan 1957 1 

University of Minnesota 1995 

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 1995 

University of Pittsburgh 2012 

University of Texas at Austin 1972 

University of Toledo 2016 

University of Virginia 2003 

University of Washington 1986 

University of Wisconsin 1957 

Vanderbilt University 2010 

Yale University 1958 

Han. Lamar Smith 

House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith, 

April16, 2018 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the 2018 and 2019 NASA 

re-authorization bilL 

AURA is pleased to see that the Search for Life elsewhere in the Universe 

continues to be supported by the Committee as a NASA goaL 

As you are no doubt aware, AURA priorities continue to be: robust support 

for the James Webb Space Telescope, especially for its operational phase 

after launch when the real science gets done; and successful completion 

of WFIRST with a coronagraph, crucial for detecting bio-signatures on 

planets around other stars. 

We are happy to work with the Committee to ensure that NASA's search 

for life elsewhere is successful, and that NASA's astrophysics missions 

continue to create world-class science for the United States. 

Sincerely, 

Matt Mountain 

AURA President 
464 

ASTROBOTIC: 

4/16/2018 

Dear Chairman Smith: 

2515 Liberty Avenue 

Pittsburgh, PA 15222 

www.astrobotic.com 

412-682-3282 

Thank you for your strong support for NASA's Lunar Science and Exploration programs in the 

NASA Authorization Act for FY 2018 and FY 2019, which is scheduled to be marked up this week. I 

was honored to testify before the Space Subcommittee last fall in support of NASA's lunar lander 

programs, and your authorization of these new programs within the Science Mission Directorate (SMD) 

and Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) witl accelerate our nation's return to the surface of the Moon 

for the first time in nearly 50 years. 

As you may know, a number of Republicans and Democrats in the House have advocated for 

these robotic lunar lander programs in both the FY 2018 and FY 2019 appropriations processes, which led 

to funding in tbe House FY 2018 Commerce~Justice~Science Appropriations Act. Your authorization 

provisions, along with the funding requested in the FY 2019 Presidents Budget Request. will continue to 

solidifY this bipartisan support this year as the Appropriations Committee prepares its FY 2019 bill. 

Specifically, the strong funding authorized for the AES Advanced Cislunar and Surface Capabilities as 

well as the increased Planetary Science funding level that will support the Lunar science payloads and 

landers services in FY 2019 is a clear indication of your committee's support for these initiatives. 

It is only fttting that this Authorization bill reasserts the need for NASA to support U.S. lunar 

lander capabilities as we approach the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 11 in FY 2019. Thank you for your 

leadership and support in this bill for NASA, industry and the science communities' efforts to restore 

American access to the lunar surface as quickly as possible. 

Sincerely, 

John Thornton 

CEO, Astrobotic 
465 

__;:=~ 

(

lBAYAREA 

~ 

&HOUST)N Eccnomicf'artrrrship 

Aprill6, 2018 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chairman, Committee on Science, 

Space and Technology 

2409 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chainnan Smith and Ranking Member Johnson, 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member, Committee on Science, 

Space and Technology 

2468 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership supports the efforts of Congressman Babin to further 

America's human spaceflight program through the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Authorization Act of20l8. The Congressman has recognized the roles of the International Space Station 

in the development of NASA's deep space exploration program and in the development of commercial 

space. We support the continued NASA operation of the International Space Station beyond 2024 

allowing for a sensible transition of operation to commercial entities, based on the development of 

capabilities by commercial operators. This approach to the utilization of the International Space Station 

will ensure America's continued leadership and presence in space. 

Rep. Babin has also recognized the unique capabilities and expertise of the Johnson Space Center to lead 

the de"elopment of human operations beyond low earth orbit. We support the utilization of these 

capabilities to reestablish Johnson Space Center as the lead center for the de"elopment and integration of 

facilities, launch vehicles and equipment related to human space flight. The leadership and management 

of the Johnson Space Center will provide assurance for the safety and schedule for deep space exploration 

programs. 

The Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership will continue to advocate NASA's human spaceflight 

program, dri"en by a desire to maintain America'sleadership in space exploration. We encourage the 

efficient utilization ofNASA's in"estments in the International Space Station, Commercial Crew and 

Resupply, the Space Launch System, Orion and NextSTEP. 

Sincerely, 

Bob Mitchell 

President, Bay Area Houston Economic Partnership 

P.O. Box 5R724 Houston Texas 77258-8724 

Voh:e: 832.536.3255 Fax: 831.,536,3258 www.bayan:ahouston.com 

~'jttJtj ltl«ii4811lal.._M.IBll~- IM&:i:atttwi&~Rlii:Brum illM &Jll illil lllliif 1Dlli !E~>M 
466 

r{J-IIOEING 

April 16, 2018 

House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Subcommittee Chairman Babin, 

On behalf of The Boeing Company, I would like to express our support and appreciation 

for the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee's NASA Authorization Act of 

2018. I also want to recognize your staff for working with stakeholders once the bill text 

was released to make additional improvements in the Manager's Amendment to ensure 

this bill fully reflects the Committee's commitment to our nation's deep space 

exploration and human spaceflight programs. 

The bill reaffirms support and full funding for the Space Launch System and NASA's 

human exploration program, authorizes the Lunar Orbital Platform-Gateway to support 

crewed missions in deep space, supports continued development and operation of a safe 

and reliable Commercial Crew capability and reasserts support for the International 

Space Station, which is one of our Nation's most important research assets. It also 

supports a healthy aeronautics research directorate that contributes to our nation's 

aerospace economy. 

Thank you again for your commitment to regular NASA reauthorization bills and we 

look forward to working with you and other members of Congress as this bill moves 

forward on the House floor. 

Best regards, 

c::/£!:~} Executive Vice President 

Government Operations 
467 

COI1VIi I!VIi!ERCIAL 

Chairman Lamar Smith 

House Science Committee 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

727 151

h Street NW, Suite 800 

Washington, DC 20005 

17 April2018 

Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson 

House Science Committee 

394 Ford House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson, 

The Commercial Spaceflight Federation (CSF}, representing over 80 member 

companies and organizations across the United States, is grateful for the time and 

energy you, your staff, and the other Members of the House Science, Space, & 

Technology Committee put into developing the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration Authorization Act of 2018. 

We appreciate the Committee's continued support and strong funding for the 

Commercial Crew and Commercial Cargo programs, recognizing their critical importance 

to continued ISS operations and, indeed, America's human spaceflight program. CSF 

Members also support the Committee's work regarding commercial low Earth orbit 

(LEO} activities, and critical path redundancy for operations beyond LEO, and publicprivate partnerships for lunar surface operations. We continue to believe that commercial 

solutions to deep space exploration are a critical advantage for the American space 

program. 

We support the Committee's authorization of full funding for the Administration's 

proposal for increased commercial operations in LEO. The legislation recognizes the 

need for a national policy and strategy for microgravity research, the continuation of a 

National Laboratory during and beyond an ISS transition, the purchase of commercial 

supply of space products for space exploration missions, and support for Flight 

Opportunities program. 

CSF and our members look forward to continuing to work with the Committee to 

encourage strong commercial space activity in America, Earth orbit, and beyond. 

Sincerely, 

tv:c~uJt-~1 Eric W. Stallmer 

President 

Commercial Spaceflight Federation 
468 

Govei'Ttment Affairs 

2121 C.ystalDrive Arlington, VA22202 

Telephone 703·413-5601 

Robert Rangel 

Senior Vice President 

Dr. Brian Babin (R· TX) 

Chairman, Hause Subcommittee an Space 

U.S. Hause of Representatives 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Babin, 

LOCKHEED MARTIN* 

April 18,2018 

On behalf of Lockheed Martin, I would like Ia thank you and your staffs for your efforts on the 

NASA Authorization Act of 2018. Your work with stakeholders to make improvements through 

a Manager's Amendment aligns the bill with the Committee's commitment to our nation's deep 

space exploration and human spaceflight programs. This effort is very much appreciated. 

We further appreciate the bill's reaffirmation of support and full funding for Orion, NASA's 

human exploration program, and the development of a lunar gateway. 

Thank you far your commitment to regular NASA authorizations, and we look forward to 

working with you and ather members of Congress an these common goals as this legislation 

moves forward. 

Best regards, 

Cc: Chairman Lamar Smith 
469 

The Honorable lamar Smith 

Chairman 

House Science, Space, and Technology 

Committee 

The Honorable Brian Babin 

Chairman 

Space Subcommittee 

April16, 2018 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member 

House Science, Space, and Technology 

Committee 

The Honorable Ami Bera 

Ranking Member 

Space Subcommittee 

Dear Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson, Chairman Babin, and Ranking Member Bera: 

As the world's leading space-based manufacturer, Made In Space is a major user of the International 

Space Station (ISS) and its National laboratory (Nl). As such, we believe it is critically important that 

Congress develop and implement a plan to maximize the use and commercialization of the ISS and its 

Nl, as well as a transition plan that ensures a seamless transfer of capabilities, including the Nl, as the 

ISS reaches the end of its life. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 

2018 helps accomplish these important goals, and Made In Space supports the bill. 

The work that Made In Space is doing on the ISS directly supports several of NASA's priorities. Our 3D 

printers on the ISS have created many custom-designed objects for the crew. This capability supports 

NASA's human exploration mission by allowing on-demand manufacturing for long-duration space 

travel. Another of our manufacturing devices is also producing ZBlAN optical fiber, which can only be 

produced optimally in space, for sale on Earth. This capability advances NASA's low Earth Orbit 

commercialization priority. Made In Space is also preparing to demonstrate the ability to 3D print and 

assemble large structures in the vacuum of space, which will allow NASA to build very large satellites, 

vehicles, and other objects without subjecting them to the rigors of the launch environment. Each of 

these programs benefits NASA, and each depends on an orderly ISS transition plan with a strong Nl 

component. 

As the bill moves forward, Made In Space hopes to work with the Committee to add language that 

specifically authorizes increases in funding for the ISS National lab and increases funding for spacebased demand activities, in order to more fully realize the goal of low Earth Orbit commercialization. 

Sincerely, 

Andrew Rush 

CEO 

Made In Space 

301827728 v1 
470 

April16, 2018 

Chairman Lamar Smith 

House Science Committee 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Ill: 

MOON EXPRESS 

Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson 

House Science Committee 

394 Ford House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson, 

Moon Express writes to express our support for H.R. 5503, the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration Authorization Act of 2018. 

We greatly appreciate the committee authorizing full funding for the two new lunar 

exploration programs proposed in NASA's 2019 Budget, the Lunar Discovery and Exploration 

Program within NASA's Science Mission Directorate and the Advanced Cislunar and Surface 

Capabilities program within NASA's Advanced Exploration Systems program. This combined 

Lunar Exploration Campaign will ensure that America leads in exploration of our nearest 

celestial neighbor. 

The Lunar Discovery and Exploration Program (LDEP) will prepare NASA for future human 

landings and entrepreneurial activity by funding the development of scientific and 

technology payloads and their deployment to lunar orbit and the lunar surface. By leveraging 

commercial launchers, landers, and platforms, NASA will be able explore the Moon, including 

conducting the lunar science missions identified in the Planetary Science Decadal, far more 

quickly and cost-effectively than if the agency was planning a more traditional exploration 

strategy. 

The Advanced Cislunar and Surface Capabilities program (ACSC) will develop commercial 

lunar lander capabilities for exploration and utilization of our nearest neighbor. The 

capabilities will support LDEP and enable the agency to undertake the Administration's 

planned series of lunar missions much more quickly and cost-effectively than if it was to 

develop such technologies in-house using traditional procurement methods. 

Moon Express also applauds the committee for its foresight in including language which 

mandates that, to the greatest extent practicable, NASA prioritize acquisition of space 

products through commercial providers or through public-private partnerships with 

commercial providers. This language, if adopted, would set the stage for the continued 

Moon Express Inc., 100 Spaceport Way, Cape Canaveral, FL 32920 1 of2 
471 

111:: 

MOON EXPRESS 

growth and expansion of the commercial space industry, and would incentivize further 

investments in innovation and the development of space capabilities that will benefit all 

Americans. 

For these reasons, Moon Express requests that the committee approve H.R. 5503. 

Sincerely, 

Robert (Bob) Richards 

Founder & CEO 

Moon Express Inc., 100 Spaceport Way, Cape Canaveral. FL 32920 2 of2 
472 

~NANO~ACKS 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chairman 

U.S. House Committee on Science, Space 

and Technology 

2409 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Brian Babin 

Chairman 

U.S. House Subcommittee on Space 

316 Cannon House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Chairman Babin: 

April17, 2018 

I am writing to thank you for your ongoing efforts to strengthen the 

U.S. space industry and to express my support for the Fiscal Years 

2018/2019 reauthorization legislation for the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration (NASA). 

We are faced today with differing challenges, whether external from 

other nations that are growing increasingly assertive in the space arena, 

and domestically as we seek to assure that America's leadership in 

space continues far into the future. Meeting these challenges requires 

innovation to further assure a robust U.S. capacity to maximize 

utilization of the space arena. 

NanoRacks is the leading commercial provider of goods and services to 

the International Space Station, and other in-space platforms, where 

the government serves as a commercial customer. We look forward to 

NanoRacks LLC 

555 Forge River Road, Suite 120 

Webster, lX, 77598 
473 

.~~ NANORACKS 

continuing and expanding our ongoing work with NASA to most costefficiently introduce new technologies and systems to meet an 

increasingly challenging environment. 

We are fortunate as a country to have leaders such as you who 

understand the challenges we face and are willing to act to improve 

American competitiveness in space. I am particularly pleased with the 

inclusion in your legislation of the recently proposed Commercial LEO 

Development program with a focus on enabling, developing and 

deploying multiple commercial orbital platforms and authorizing 

$150,000,000 for these purposes in Fiscal Year 2019. 

Thank you in advance for your consideration of my strong support for 

the Fiscal Years 2018/2019 NASA reauthorization measure. I am 

pleased to provide any additional information which may be helpful 

and I look forward to working with you and your staff to improve this 

important bill as it moves through the legislative process. 

Sincerely, 

Jeffrey Manber 

Chief Executive Officer 

NanoRacks LLC 

555 Forge River Road, Suite 120 

Webster, TX, 77598 
474 

N~ National Space Grant Alliance 

Aprill7, 2018 

Han. Lamar Smith 

Chair 

House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith, 

On behalf of the National Space Grant Alliance, I want to thank the Chairman for including a reauthorization of the 

National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program in H.R. 5503, the NASA Reauthorization Bill for 2018 and 

2019. We would also like to state our support as well for the reauthorization of NASA's Office of Education and 

the broad programs that are funded through that office. 

Space Grant is a competitive, state-federal partnership that functions through consortia in all 50 states, Puerto Rico, 

Guam, the Virgin Islands, and the District of Columbia. Tbe program enables students to engage in outreach 

activities and research projects that prepare them for STEM careers. Space Grant consortia are effective catalysts 

in each state to help grow a high-tech workforce. With over 800 partner institutions, this program promotes 

aerospace and other NASA relevant STEM education activities, and helps sustain a pipeline of students for 

innovative, high-tech jobs. For every dollar that NASA provides, Space Grant consortia contribute on average an 

equal or greater amount from non-federal sources to maximize resources available to students in their states. 

Because this is a federal-state partnership, the Space Grant program not only addresses national needs, but has 

proven to be very effective at fulfilling state and regional STEM goals-NASA program data shows that, of all 

participating students graduating in a particular year, over 80% move on to either a STEM job in industry, NASA, 

academia, or they enroll in a STEM graduate program. 

Thank you again for your leadership in supporting NASA's Office of Education and the Space Grant Program. We 

look forward to working with you and the committee to ensure that STEM education continues to be a priority for 

our nation. 

Sincerely, 

f?-

John B. Kosmatka, Ph.D., P.E 

Chair, National Space Grant Alliance 

Director, CalUornia Space Grant Con11ortlum 

Proressor and Callaway GotrChair or Structural Mechanics 

Univenity of California, Sao Diego 

e-mail: jkosmatka@ucsd.edu Phone: (858) 534·1779 
475 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

2409 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

2468 Rayburn Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson, 

The Planetary Society is pleased to see the House Science Committee advance 

H.R. 5503 as amended, and is particularly supportive of its recommendation for a 

critical funding increase to planetary science while maintaining overall balance in the 

science mission directorate and NASA writ large. 

The Planetary Science Division is in a period of rebuilding, and the $2.6 billion 

authorization would be a critical step in maintaining U.S. leadership in space 

science and exploration in the next decade. 

Planetary defense is a high priority for The Planetary Society. Congress has 

consistently taken the lead on this topic since the 1990s by directing NASA to 

pursue NEO detection and classification, and this bill continues that legacy. The 

Society supports the language endorsing NEOCam or a similar space-based near 

earth object (NEO) detection capability. 

The Society is also very pleased to see that Mars remains a top destination for 

human spaceflight goals, and that NASA will be directed to prioritize human 

exploration beyond low-Earth orbit. The Society also supports the language that 

advances the important debate regarding the future of the International Space 

Station, and how NASA can find ways to reduce costs in order to pursue human 

exploration beyond Earth. 

We command the committee for working in a bipartisan manner during the markup 

process to support all of space science and exploration at NASA, and its efforts to 

forge a consensus path forward for the nation's space program. 

Sincerely, 

Casey Dreier 

Director of Space Policy 

The Planetary Society 

60S.LQJRoblll'sAvenue 

Pllsadena.5:A91101·2016 USA 

626.793.5100 

fUJI; 626.79'3.5528 

BlltNye 

Chi£fC~~tt~~!fvt0{ficer 

.k!tlnUerVaulf!n 

Chil'fOperatlns()fflcer 

BOARD OF DIRECTORS 

~T.Gerac! 

Ch<llrm<~~~!>lfhe!loard 

JatMS&ll 

,_, 

Held! Hammel 

VkePmlde!tt 

..,..,. ChldExecutlveOI'flcer 

C.WallaceHooer 

'=""" 

ton levin 

G.S<:ottHubbard 

Alexlsl!vanos 

John Logsdon 

RGbertPicardQ 

BrltneySchmldt 

Bijai"Bee'ThHore 

FUlmore Wood 

ADV!§ORY COUNCIL 

Bll1:lAidrln 

RQbertD.Sraun 

DavldBrin 

Gan-yE.Hunt 

BruceJakQo.ky 

Chlll"lesE.I<ohlha5e)r. 

laurk!L<~sl':dn 

Joolombffg 

R.osalylopes 

Bob McDonald 

OannaLShll"tev 

Pe~Siosberg 

Ke~~fnStube 

lorneTrQttler 

N-elldeGra$SeTyson 
476 

April17, 2018 

Chairman Lamar Smith 

House Science Committee. . . \ ·,, 

2321 Rayburn House affl.ce'Bb~ Washington, DC20St5 '' 

Sincerely, 

Frank A. DiBello 

President and CEO 

Space Florida 

1010 ODVSSEY WAY, lUll'!'£ ;JOIJ, I!IU>i.OIU.TI03N ~AIIUC, 11:1. !29U 

T ll21.7:&0.1!iJ01 ' !IP.U:I!Iti.Giii£).1.,@0V 
477 

Office of the Chancellor 

THE TEXAS A&M UNNERSilY SYSTEM 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chair 

House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith: 

Aprill7,2018 

Thank you for your leadership in bringing H.R. 5503, the NASA Reauthorization Bill for 

2018 and 20 19, before the full committee for deliberation. The bill's record high authorization 

numbers in critical areas such as science, aeronautics, and human exploration are a testament to 

the committee's desire to keep our nation at the forefront of technology and innovation for the 

future. 

As the Chairman well knows, Texas is a leader in space exploration. From human 

spaceflight to aeronautics, our state boasts strong industries and universities committed to near 

and long-term solutions to challenging problems. The Texas A&M University System is proud 

to have world-renowned expertise in human spaceflight research, hypersonics, and unmanned 

aerial vehicles. Indeed, Texas A&M has been actively involved with human spaceflight research 

from robotics, to human performance to agriculture. Further, Texas A&M is home to one of five 

NASA university leadership initiatives where we are performing research to design commercial 

supersonic aircraft that can modifY their shape during a flight to help minimize noise from sonic 

booms. Texas A&M- Corpus Christi hosts one of the six FAA unmanned aircraft system (UAS) 

test sites and has been working with NASA on UAS research for many years. We are pleased 

that the committee recognizes the importance of these areas by prioritizing research in human 

space exploration, increasing the aeronautics budget, including $30 million for hypersonics 

research, and authorizing programs in UAS research. 

Texas A&M is also a Space Grant College, and we are committed to training the next 

generation of students for careers in the growing aerospace field. We appreciate that the 

committee funds the NASA Education account at $1 00 million and includes full funding for the 

Space Grant program. Keeping this state-based program funded is important to ensuring that all 

students nationwide have access to quality STEM initiatives and are prepared for the jobs of 

tomorrow. 

301 Tarrow Street, 7th Floor· College Station, Texas 77840~ 7896 

(979) 458-6000 ·Fax (979) 458-6044 • www.tamus.edu 
478 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Aprill7, 2018 

Page 2 

Thank you again for keeping our space program as a top priority for the committee and 

Congress. It is critical that we continue to support the agency, as well as commercial ventures, to 

keep our state and nation in the lead worldwide. 

(?/54-

John Sharp 

Chancellor 

cc: Mr. Scott Sudduth, Esq. 

Associate Vice Chancellor and Director, Federal Relations 
479 

ROBBIE SABATHIER 

Vice President, Washington Operations 

and Communications 

April23, 2018 

House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Buflding 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Subcommittee Chairman Babin, 

On behalf of United launch Alliance, I would like to congratulate you and your staff for your work on the 

NASA Authorization Acl of 2018. In particular, I want to thank you for working with stakeholders after the 

bill's release to construct a Manager's Amendment with meaningful inputs that helped further Improve the 

bHI. 

We commend the Committee for ~s strong support of human exploration, and robust funding authority for 

the Space Launch System (SLS), Orion Multipurpose Crew Vehicle, commercial crew, and commercial 

cargo programs. We also appreciate your support of a second Mobile Launch Plalfonn and Interim 

Cryogenic Propulsion Stege which enable the busy manifest for the SLS and Orton systems. In addition, 

your efforts help strengthen America's space Industrial base and take the first steps In establishing how 

the government and commercial sector wtll work together to establish a CisLunar economy, and what a 

legal regime to govern such an economy wtlllook like. 

We are at a critical juncture In our nation's space program. As we prepare to launch some of the most 

advanced spacecraft ever built, launch the world's most powerful rocket carrying the capsule that wlll take 

humans to the Moon, Mars, and beyond, and launch American astronauts from American soil once again, 

it Is vital that Congress and the Administration work together to ensure our nation stays the course. 

Together, we will ensure the United States remains the leading nation in space. Thank you for your 

leadership; we look forward to working with you and your colleagues as this bUI advances. 

Unltod launch Alliance 

1300Y/ilson Blvd. Sulte950 

Arlington. VA 22209 
480 

Sent: Tuesday, April17, 2018 9:33AM 

Subject: Vector Space 

"On behalf of Vector Launch, part of emerging multi-billion dollar commercial space industry, we very 

much support the NASA Authorization bill that, among other innovative initiatives, strongly encourages 

NASA to rely on commercial services & products in order to reduce the bill for the American taxpayer, 

refocus on its core R&D capabilities while advancing America's leadership in space" 
481 

VIRGINIA COMMERCIAL SPACE FLIGHT AUTHORITY 

April16, 2018 

Dear Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson, Chairman Babin and Ranking Member Bera: 

I write to thank you for the inclusion of language in your Manager's Amendment to 

continue authorization of the 21'1 Century launch Complex program, which provides vital 

infrastructure support for NASA's launch complexes and ranges that support cargo resupply 

missions to the International Space Station (ISS), including at Wallops Flight Facility. We 

appreciate the work you and your staff have done to help support this reauthorization and it 

will ensure that NASA's launch ranges are prepared to meet the growing demands of our space 

program in the years ahead. 

As you may know, state spaceports --like the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport (MARS) 

at Wallops-- have invested hundreds of millions of dollars at Federal launch sites to support 

NASA missions and provide new low-cost capabilities for NASA, Defense and commercial users, 

while also improving resiliency and responsiveness. The language included in this provision also 

urges NASA to fully leverage these state investments and partner with state spaceports to meet 

infrastructure demands to support ISS and other missions. 

It is helpful to have NASA regularly reauthorized to ensure that policy provisions 

continue to keep pace with the important work going on at launch sites and centers. I applaud 

your efforts to advance a reauthorization bill for FY 2018 and FY 2019 and appreciate the work 

of your staff and the other Members on your committee to support this process. 

Finally, I invite you and your entire committee to join us for our next launch (tentatively 

scheduled for late May) of Orbital ATK's Antares rocket and Cygnus spacecraft to ISS. We 

would be honored to host you and show you how our partnership with NASA has and continues 

to support our nation's space program. 

Sincerely, 

tJ.t A: ;fa/, 

Dale K. Nash 

CEO and Executive Director 

Virginia Commercial Space Flight Authority 

Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport 
482 

Mr. BABIN. Thank you, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Babin. 

The gentleman from California, the Ranking Member of the 

Space Subcommittee, Mr. Bera, is recognized for an opening statement. 

Mr. BERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The importance of our investments in NASA and its ability to inspire can’t be underestimated. I often talk about my childhood and 

vivid recollections of the space program and the influence that 

NASA and the Apollo program had in my pursuit of science and 

medicine. 

NASA’s work also helps us attract the best and brightest to go 

into STEM disciplines and contributes to world-class work force. 

Our work force not only makes NASA’s scientific discoveries possible, but it powers an engine of innovation and economic strength 

for our country through its advances in human exploration, aeronautics, and space technology. 

Mr. Chairman, one of the things that I’ve enjoyed most about, 

you know, working with the Ranking Subcommittee Chairman Mr. 

Babin is how bipartisan our—and collaborative our hearings have 

been, you know, whether we’re talking about deep space exploration, the discovery of planets and the habitable zone, looking for 

life out there, you know. 

But what bothers me and what has me concerned about today’s 

NASA authorization bill under consideration is that both I and my 

colleagues received this bill on Friday. With Fiscal Year 2018 appropriations of $20.7 billion, NASA’s the largest agency under the 

jurisdiction of this Committee. While I understand the majority 

and minority staff were communicating on a discussion draft of the 

bill, Democratic staff did not receive proposed funding numbers 

and a finalized bill text until late last week. 

Mr. Chairman, we both share the goal of sustaining a strong 

NASA that is funded sufficiently to complete the tasks the Nation 

has asked of it. However, I have concerns about how a rushed 

markup process can help us reach that goal together. Our colleagues just returned to Washington last night, leaving little time 

to fully consider the bill and the funding and policy direction it 

would give to NASA. Moreover, I remain worried about potential 

implications of a rushed markup on that important policy, issues 

regarding our space program, especially in light of NASA’s need to 

reassess program and spending plans following the recently enacted Fiscal Year 2018 omnibus. 

Turning to the content of the bill, the proposed $474 million cut 

to earth sciences for Fiscal Year 2019 is deeply concerning when 

NASA’s earth science data played a key role in informing our response to a number of natural disasters that wreaked havoc this 

past year. 

At the same time, the bill proposes increasing the planetary 

science account by more than $400 million above Fiscal Year 2018 

appropriated levels without any basis policy guidance on how to— 

how the increase is to be spent. In addition, the astrophysics 

decadal survey’s top-ranked WFIRST mission that we discussed 

during our NASA Fiscal Year 2019 budget hearing and its poten-
483 

tial to return transformational science is called into question in 

this bill. 

The role of NASA’s space technology program, including important initiatives on satellite servicing and its potential applications 

for industry, also could be shortchanged. Further, policy would be 

set on the International Space Station transition without the opportunity of our Committee to review NASA’s recently submitted 

transition plan, as required by last year’s NASA Transitional Authorization Act. The future of ISS is a major policy issue and one 

that deserves the Committee’s oversight. 

Mr. Chairman, this Committee’s policy and direction for NASA 

will be felt in the next generation of stargazers, space explorers, 

business leaders, scientists, and engineers. Before we legislate, we 

have an obligation to take the time to hold hearings, gather the 

necessary information, consider the views of stakeholders, and 

weigh the decisions that will help sustain a strong and stable future for NASA. 

With that, I look forward to working with you to that end and 

having those hearings. Thank you, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you, Mr. Bera. And let me respond 

to a couple of your points. And the first is to reassure you and 

other Members of the Committee that between now and the House 

floor we will continue to have discussions on policies, and those discussions will be in good faith. 

I realize that the minority has not had as much time as they 

would’ve liked. On the other hand, we have complied with all requirements, legislative and otherwise. And while I regret that staff 

has to work on weekends, I sometimes think that that simply has 

to be done. And I know the majority staff did work over the weekend as well. 

So I’m hoping we can go forward with a good-faith bipartisan effort that after the Perlmutter amendment will allow all Members 

to support the bill. 

And to that end let me say that we are going to take up the 

amendment in the nature of a substitute—I mean, the manager’s 

amendment by Mr. Babin first, after which we will go to Mr. 

Perlmutter’s amendment. 

Let’s see. The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Babin, is recognized to 

offer the manager’s amendment. 

Mr. BABIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. And does the gentleman have an amendment 

at the desk? 

Mr. BABIN. I do have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 5503 offered by Mr. Babin of 

Texas, amendment number 001. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his manager’s amendment. 

Mr. BABIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

This amendment represents a good-faith effort to incorporate 

constructive feedback received from stakeholders after the introduction of the bill. It also contains technical corrections. This 

amendment emphasizes the President’s goal to lead the return of 
484 

humans to the moon for long-term exploration and utilization, followed by human missions to Mars and other destinations. 

Furthermore, this amendment makes it clear that NASA shall 

pursue the expeditious development of a new-build second mobile 

launch platform, and NASA shall also procure a second interim 

cryogenic propulsion stage. 

Finally, this amendment encourages NASA to leverage State 

Government infrastructure investments and also requires a report 

by NASA on procurement opportunities, commercial and space 

services, or infrastructure for exploration. 

I support this amendment and urge my colleagues to do the 

same. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Babin. 

Let me respond real quickly and say that I thank him for this 

amendment. The manager’s amendment makes technical and conforming changes to the bill and also makes changes that result 

from members’ and stakeholder feedback. The amendment improves the bill, and I thank again the Chairman of the Space Subcommittee for his good work on this. 

And the gentlewoman from Texas, the Ranking Member, is recognized. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the 

last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I’m reluctantly going to have to oppose the gentleman’s amendment in its current form. I appreciate the fact that the 

amendment fixes some of the problems with the bill that resulted 

from the rush to mark up the bill that clearly is not ready for 

markup. Reversing the funding incorrectly allocated to the 2 million exploration projects, SLS and Orion is an obvious example. 

The amendment also gets rid of problematic commercialization language that had not been adequately vetted. 

If the changes had been confined to those items and to the technical corrections that are included, I probably could support this 

amendment. Unfortunately, the amendment also adds additional 

provisions, another indication of a bill that was brought to markup 

before it was ready. 

And some of these provisions are problematic or premature. 

These range from endorsing the President’s exploration priorities 

without even having seen the long overdue exploration roadmap 

this Committee asked for in 2017 Transition Act, apparently imposing an unfunded mandate on NASA to develop a second ICPS, and 

requiring a wasteful and unnecessary GAO report. 

In sum, the gentleman’s amendment makes some useful corrections, but it also includes additional provisions that need more 

scrutiny. I hope that the gentleman would consider withdrawing 

this amendment to allow time to address these issues. 

I thank you and yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. Is there any further 

discussion on the amendment? 

If not, the question is on agreeing to the manager’s amendment 

offered by Mr. Babin. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 
485 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

The next amendment is going to be an amendment offered by the 

gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter, and he is recognized for 

that purpose. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk, number 28. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 5503 offered by Mr. Perlmutter 

of Colorado, amendment number 028. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with the 

reading of the amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain the 

amendment. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. The amendment is sort of at the heart of some 

of the concerns that we have concerning the bill, and I appreciate 

the Chairman’s agreement to continue to allow negotiations by all 

of us as this—as the overall bill moves forward. 

The amendment that I have proposed, amendment 28, is to restore $471 million, which was a 25 percent cut from the Fiscal Year 

2018 budget for earth sciences. So the purpose is to restore that 

cut. I want to remind everyone what earth sciences, what this line 

item really is. It is to develop a scientific understanding of the 

earth system and its response to natural or human-induced 

changes and to improve prediction of climate, weather, and natural 

hazards both for personal safety, as well as commerce. What we’re 

trying to do is have the best data we can gather about the earth’s 

oceans, service, and atmosphere, and try to understand our planet 

to the best of our ability. That understanding will improve weather 

forecasts and has a tremendous impact on the safety of our constituents and the flow of commerce across the world. 

I was pleased to see language in this bill which acknowledges the 

work of the recently released earth sciences decadal survey. Included in the survey was a wealth of information on the importance 

of earth science data and how we use this data in our daily lives. 

The decadal survey acknowledged the tight budget environment 

facing earth science research, and they made some tough decisions 

in putting together that document, but the fact is that even under 

current funding there’s about 1/3 less than what is necessary. Cuts 

like initially proposed in the bill of 25 percent only exacerbate the 

problem and undercut the earth science decadal survey that the 

bill actually endorses. 

So I urge my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans, to support 

the amendment to restore the $471 million cut to earth sciences so 

that we can have the equipment and the services that are necessary for us to understand how all of this fits together, whether 

it’s through weather satellites or just the continued observations 

that we make through the NASA line item budget. 

With that, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Perlmutter. 

Let me recognize myself in support of the amendment and say 

at the outset I appreciate his initiative in drafting this amendment 

and offering it now. I also appreciate the support of the Ranking 
486 

Member and Mr. Bera, the Ranking Member of the Space Subcommittee. 

This was not an easy amendment for the majority to swallow, 

and I think you all know that. But we are going forward in good 

faith with majority support because we want to generally and hopefully increase the prospects of this NASA bill going forward on the 

floor and beyond that. So I recognize this amendment represents 

a compromise. I hope there will be strong support on both sides to 

show good faith for the process, which includes bipartisanship discussions, as well as an effort to try to do the best we can for NASA. 

So, again, thank you for the amendment. 

And is there anyone else who wishes to be recognized on this 

amendment? Does the Ranking Member want to be recognized? 

Ms. JOHNSON. I support the amendment, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you. Anyone else? Mr. Bera? 

Mr. BERA. I support the amendment as well. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Anyone else want to speak any longer on 

the amendment? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I’m happy to talk some more. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. And I think we’re fine over here. All right. 

Let’s see. Without any further discussion on the amendment, the 

question is on agreeing to Mr. Perlmutter’s amendment. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The amendment is agreed to, and we will now—the gentleman 

from Colorado is recognized. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Can we have a recorded vote? 

Chairman SMITH. A recorded vote has been requested, and as 

mentioned earlier, the recorded votes will be postponed. 

Up next is—we’ll now go back to regular order on the list of 

amendments, and the next one is going to be offered by the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Posey, and he is recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. POSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at 

the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 5503 offered by Mr. Posey of 

Florida, amendment number 049. 

Chairman SMITH. And without objection, the amendment will be 

considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. POSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Following the public disclosure of security and export control violations at its research centers, the Administration contacted—contracted with the National Academy of Public Administration to conduct an independent assessment of how the Administration carried 

out foreign national access management practices and other security matters. The assessment by the National Academy of Public 

Administration concluded that NASA networks are compromised 

and the Administration lacked a standardized and systematic approach to export compliance and that individuals within the Administration were not held accountable when making serious preventable errors in carrying out foreign national access management 

processes and other security matters. 
487 

This amendment simply requires the Administration to report to 

the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of 

Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation over in the Senate on how it plans to address each 

of the recommendations made to the security assessment by the 

National Academy of Public Administration regarding security and 

safeguarding export control information. I ask my colleagues to 

support this amendment, and I yield back the remainder of my 

time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Posey, for your amendment, 

and I support it. It will ensure that the information technology security recommendations from the National Academy of Public Administration on foreign national access management are in fact implemented, and I encourage Members to support the amendment. 

Is there anyone who wishes to be recognized on the amendment? 

If not, the question is on agreeing to the Posey amendment. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. 

We will now go to an amendment to be offered by the gentleman 

from Florida, Mr. Dunn, and he is recognized. 

Mr. DUNN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Chairman Babin of 

the Subcommittee, Ranking Members—— 

Chairman SMITH. And—— 

Mr. DUNN [continuing]. Johnson and Ami Bera. 

Chairman SMITH. And the gentleman has an amendment at the 

desk, and the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 5503 offered by Mr. Dunn of 

Florida, amendment number 041. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman continues to be recognized to explain his amendment. 

Mr. DUNN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. This is an exciting day for the Members of the Committee. We have the opportunity to help shape the authorities and funding of NASA and its 

partners that they’ll use to advance space exploration and science. 

So with that objective in mind, I’m offering amendment 41. 

State and local governments have invested hundreds of millions 

of dollars in new space-related infrastructure that benefits Federal 

civil programs, national security programs and missions, as well as 

the commercial space industry. This amendment proposes a report 

that describes those investments and partnerships that have benefited the Federal, commercial, and State users. It also requires reporting on the prospective or burgeoning opportunities for FederalState matching grant funding to support shared infrastructure, as 

well as how these partnerships can be expanded to better serve 

civil, national security, and commercial space missions. 

And I ask that the Committee support this amendment to H.R. 

5503. And with that, I yield back. Thank you. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Dunn. I’ll recognize myself in 

support of the amendment, which creates a lasting partnership between NASA and State and local governments. 

In a limited budget environment, we must make difficult choices 

about how to fund Federal programs. The ability to leverage the 
488 

strengths and expertise of State and local governments will help to 

maintain American space leadership now and in the future. So I 

thank Mr. Dunn for offering this amendment. I urge my colleagues 

to support it. 

If there’s no further discussion, all in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. 

Next up is an amendment to be offered by the gentleman from 

California, Mr. Rohrabacher, and he is recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much. 

Chairman SMITH. And—— 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman—— 

Chairman SMITH [continuing]. The gentleman has an amendment at the desk. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And without objection, the amendment is a— 

the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 5503 offered by Mr. Rohrabacher of California, amendment number 025. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

When I first arrived here a number of years ago, I was told that 

the House and the Senate have one thing in common with both the 

House and Senate, and that is that we both have 100 Members 

who are total idiots. And let me just say that what we have been 

witnessing with the prevention of an Administrator for NASA for 

over 15 months is a disgrace. It’s a disgrace for not just the Senate, 

not just the House, for Congress in general. Congress is not doing 

its job in a number of areas. I think it underscores that we do need 

some fundamental reform of our process, both Senate and House. 

But today, we realize that the Senate, on something that could 

very easily be done, and that is a confirmation of a NASA Administrator. And we have a fellow—a colleague who we all know who’s 

bright, he’s creative, who could do—be doing a fantastic job for our 

country through—as being the Administrator of NASA. He’s been 

held up by the U.S. Senate. 

And we need—now, let me just note that Robert Lightfoot as Acting Administrator of NASA has done a terrific job. We’ve all had 

a chance to talk with him and work with them, so my hat’s off to 

him, but it is disgraceful that we have not actually put in place an 

Administrator, permanent Administrator. 

So my amendment States—this is getting tough—no appropriations shall be authorized to NASA until a NASA Administrator 

nominee is confirmed by the U.S. Senate. That’s simple as that. 

And if the Senate doesn’t think that it’s important enough to vote 

on a NASA Administrator, maybe they don’t think it’s important 

for us to fund NASA. And that’s that. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Does the gentleman yield? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I certainly would. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. 

And I agree with you 100 percent that Mr. Bridenstine ought to 

be confirmed by the Senate, and this delay is really unconscionable 
489 

because the agency needs leadership. Mr. Lightfoot was fantastic. 

He has now stepped down. But I’d ask my friend, do you really 

need the sledgehammer at this point about no funding for NASA? 

That would be my—— 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Well, if the Chairman would ask me to put 

my big hammer down and lay it aside for a little while, I guess I’d 

be willing to acquiesce to our fine Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Does the gentleman wish to withdraw the 

amendment? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I withdraw my amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn, but you sure got Mr. Perlmutter’s attention, which was 

worth doing. 

The gentleman from California has another amendment. He’s 

recognized for the purposes of offering that. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. This is 

Rohrabacher second amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 5503 offered by Mr. Rohrabacher of California, amendment number 026. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain the 

amendment. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I have quite often mentioned that there is a 

major threat looming that we have not dealt with and that we 

should make sure that we spend more time making sure that our— 

that the whole job we’re trying to do in space cannot be destroyed 

by space debris. And I believe space debris is a very serious challenge. It’s actually—I believe as we move on, space debris is going 

to be as great a challenge in getting things done in space as are 

the technical and just—of what we’re trying to accomplish with 

various technologies that we’re bringing to bear. 

So my amendment again emphasizes that the space debris actually is reaching a point where collisions of—with space debris may 

cause more space debris. And basically, what we’re asking for is 

that this be reaffirmed in the authorization bill that space debris 

something that should be a high priority for NASA to be looking 

at and dealt with. 

Chairman SMITH. Does the gentleman yield back his time? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher. I just want to 

say I support your amendment. I appreciate your long-standing interest in this subject, and I hope other Members will support it as 

well. 

Does anyone wish to be heard on this amendment? 

If not—— 

Ms. JOHNSON. It just makes more sense than the last one. 

Chairman SMITH. The Ranking Member says it makes more 

sense than the last one. But I’ll let—we’ll take that as a yes. OK. 

OK. 

All—if there’s no further discussion, all in favor of the Rohrabacher amendment—this is the second amendment—say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 
490 

And the gentleman from California is recognized for his third 

and last amendment. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes. I’m buoyed by the fact that I have received such support from the other side of the aisle on my last 

amendment. Let me note that what we have—and my—oh, I have 

an amendment at the floor. OK. What it is—we are—determination—insert a new paragraph, determinations by the Administrator 

or Secretary under paragraph D must be publicly disclosed 30 days 

prior to the acquisition of such space products. 

What we’re talking about—my amendment is talking about is 

there’s a requirement that whenever the Administrator makes a 

decision as to what type of technologies and what type of supplies 

are needed by the space program, that it—that basically, we—and 

that we try to do commercial rather than simply leave it a matter 

of leaving it up to the government and the bureaucracy. 

Well, there is an exception to that that allows the—that permits 

the Administrator to actually, you know, go—to go and decide not 

to use the commercial alternatives. And it States, ‘‘In carrying out 

space exploration missions, Administrator shall prioritize acquisitions to use in space products provided by the United States and 

other commercial—and commercial United States providers.’’ 

Let me note there is an exception to that provision, and I like 

the provision. The provision underscores America’s fundamental 

strengths, which is by using the commercial and the private sector, 

we’re able to bring things in a costly manner, actually more costly 

than just using the government. It creates a marketplace which 

will bring down the cost of future needs. And anyway, we need to 

really encourage commercial use and alternatives for our space 

missions. 

My amendment comes to place in that exception which is the 

NASA Administrator or the Secretary of the Air Force to make a 

determination that the commercial approach is not—the commercial space is not really right in this specific decision. Well, I think 

that’s fine, but what my amendment does is make certain that 

there is an accountability if commercial space alternatives are not 

being used. And it just requires that the Secretary—or the Administrator and the Secretary of Air Force actually make—you know, 

make public why they made that decision. And it’s a matter of 

transparency basically. 

And so with that, I said, it is clear, however, to me that we have 

not worked out the wording of this in a way that’s acceptable to 

everyone. And I appreciate your leadership, Mr. Chairman, and so 

I’m going to be withdrawing this amendment, which makes this 

mandate of whenever they’re not using commercial, that it actually 

be explained and be publicly presented. But we—the idea is a good 

idea, but I understand there’s some objections to specific wording 

of how my—with an understanding that we’ll work together on 

finding the right wording where both sides of the aisle can agree 

and that we can all agree. I’d be willing to withdraw my amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. And without objection, the amendment is 

withdrawn, but let me reassure the gentleman from California 

that, as he suggested, we will continue to work on the language. 
491 

And I do appreciate the statement and—that he made and his interest in the subject. 

We will now—— 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. And I withdraw my amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection. 

We will now go to another amendment offered by the gentleman 

from California, Mr.—I mean by Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thanks, Mr. Chair. I have an amendment 

number 27 at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 5503 offered by Mr. Perlmutter 

of Colorado, amendment number 027. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I ask for unanimous consent to dispense with 

the reading of the amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Without objection. 

And the gentleman is recognized to explain the amendment, 

which is being handed out as we speak. OK. The gentleman is recognized on the condition that he doesn’t hold up a bumper sticker 

that says Mars 2033. Oh, no, no, no, no, no. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thanks, Mr. Chair. I know all of you were worried that I wouldn’t hold up my bumper sticker of Mars 2033 today, 

but I just want to assure you we still have plenty, and you’re welcome to come to my office and get them for your cars. 

As you’ve all heard me discuss on numerous occasions, we had 

testimony a couple years ago detailing how the orbits of Earth and 

Mars align in the year 2033 to be one of the shortest distances 

which would allow a human mission to Mars to shave off months 

off of the trip to that planet. Obviously, by shortening the trip, it 

reduces the risks our astronauts might face from radiation or who 

knows what else. 

Today, we are building the Orion multipurpose crew vehicle and 

the Space Launch System to carry us on this historic journey, and 

American industry and our partners around the world are working 

on the other technologies needed to accomplish this feat. 

Because this endeavor is not going to be just NASA or just the 

United States, we’re going to need public-private partnerships and 

the international community and all work together to get this done, 

as the Vice President discussed and described in his speech yesterday in Colorado. 

The missing piece to this puzzle right now is a requirement for 

NASA to efficiently plan on how we would take advantage of this 

opportunity in 2033, if not before, and what we need to be doing 

on what timelines to get humans to Mars in 2033 or before because 

we’ve had testimony from SpaceX and some others that it’s possible 

to get our astronauts to Mars even before 2033. My amendment 

helps fix that problem by giving NASA the task to better incorporate a 2033 mission into their long-term exploration plans. 

A number of people on this panel or in industry are excited by 

talk from the Administration of going back to moon, but as the Vice 

President said yesterday and as we’ve talked about on this Committee, that could just be a steppingstone to our real mission, 

which ultimately is to get to Mars. I think our—the amendment 

that I propose accomplishes that, and I urge support for the 

amendment. And with that, I yield back. 
492 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Perlmutter. I support the 

amendment and yield to the gentleman from Texas, Chairman 

Babin. 

Mr. BABIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I thank the gentleman from Colorado for his amendment, 

which I do support. Human exploration of Mars is a very important—it is the big—the big goal, the ultimate goal is to get to Mars 

by 2033, if not sooner. There are quite a few things that need to 

be done science-wise and experimentation-wise. Radiation is one of 

them, a lot of medical problems that we need to address and remedy before we can get astronauts there and safely back. But this 

amendment provides great direction to NASA toward that ultimate 

end, and I fully support it. I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Babin. 

Is there anyone else who wishes to be—the gentlewoman from 

Texas, the Ranking Member, is recognized. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the 

last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I support the gentleman’s—from Colorado’s 

amendment to privatize human exploration to Mars by 2033. While 

other human—OK. Prioritize, yes. While other human exploration 

endeavors that NASA engages in is—all have merit, and I do believe that they should contribute toward the goal of going to Mars. 

Mr. Perlmutter’s amendment recognizes the priority and also 

provides a date for NASA to work toward. I think we’ve heard this 

date before, and I encourage all of my colleagues to support this 

amendment, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

If there’s no further discussion on the amendment, the question 

is on the Perlmutter amendment. 

All in favor, say aye. 

All opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

The gentleman from Colorado has the next amendment as well, 

and he is recognized for the purpose of offering that. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have an amendment 

at the desk, number 26. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 5503 offered by Mr. Perlmutter 

of Colorado, amendment number 026. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman from Colorado is recognized to explain the amendment. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m going to offer this 

and then withdraw it pursuant to the Chairman’s committing to 

the fact we can negotiate further as this bill moves along in the 

process. 

The bill—or the amendment that I proposed is to add $8 million 

to the National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program or 

the Space Grant, and it allows—is part of a competitive State and 

Federal partnership through a consortia in all 50 States, Puerto 

Rico, and the District of Columbia. And the program enable students to engage in outreach activities and research projects that 
493 

prepare them for STEM careers and working with a wide array of 

industry partners in their communities. 

Space Grant consortia are catalysts in each State to help grow 

the high-tech work force, and with nearly 1,000 partner institutions, this program promotes aerospace and other NASA and 

STEM education activities and helps sustain a pipeline of students 

for innovative high-tech jobs. 

When I speak with the aerospace industry in Colorado, one of 

their biggest needs is a passionate and skilled work force, and the 

Space Grant helps provide just that. We’ve held this Space Grant 

level for a number of years now, even as we’ve seen the NASA 

budget grow, and the purpose is to increase that Space Grant line 

item. 

And I would just—before I withdraw it, I would just say to my 

friends from Texas that just about every single institution in your 

State—and you have a lot of them—are—benefit in some way or 

another from the Space Grant program. And I didn’t know the University of Texas has like a dozen different venues for their institution, and each one of those benefits. 

So it is a—it’s an excellent program. It leverages both State and 

Federal money. The various aerospace companies benefit by it, but 

certainly NASA and our space program benefit by it. I will withdraw my amendment, Mr. Chairman, so that we can discuss it at 

greater length as the bill moves through the process. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn, but let me reassure the individual that I am and I think 

a lot of us support the increase of $8 million. And just so that all 

Members understand why I think this is going to be able to be 

worked out, the gentleman from Colorado’s amendment increases 

the amount for this fellowship program from $40 million to $48 

million. Again, I support that. The only difference of opinion we 

have is whether the entire category is increased from $100 million 

to $108 million, so that’s, I suspect, fairly easy to work out between 

now and the House floor. But we do agree with the additional $8 

million. The question is whether to increase the overall account by 

$8 million. So I think we’ll work that out. 

I appreciate the gentleman withdrawing the amendment. And we 

have two further amendments. We have a late amendment offered 

by Mr. Foster and then another amendment offered by Mr. Knight, 

and I believe that will conclude our markup. 

The gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Foster, is recognized for the 

purpose of offering an amendment. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at 

the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. All right. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 5503 offered by Mr. Foster of Illinois, amendment number 093. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain the 

amendment. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, Chairman Smith. 

My amendment is designed to encourage NASA to have a hard 

look at reducing or eliminating the use of high-enriched uranium, 
494 

otherwise known as weapons-grade uranium, in future missions. As 

you know, NASA is currently advancing various nuclear reactors 

for deep space missions, particularly to Mars. One of them is for 

spacecraft propulsion, which would likely utilize low-enriched, that 

is non-weapons-grade uranium. The second is for surface power, 

which would potentially utilize high-enriched or weapons-grade 

uranium. 

High-enriched uranium is one of the most dangerous materials 

on earth because of its direct significance for potential use in nuclear weapons and acts of nuclear terrorism, which is why the 

elimination globally of stockpiles has been a longstanding U.S. policy objective. It is also a material that is very dangerous to handle 

during normal assembly when you can have criticality incidents. 

This is appreciated by NASA’s Marshall Spaceflight Center, 

which is leading the development of the propulsion reactor system 

utilizing low-enriched uranium. An underappreciated point about 

this is that the utilization of high-enriched uranium in any space 

reactor would result in considerable security-related cost and inhibit the participation of commercial and academic partners for development of testing—and testing and establish a very worrisome 

precedent for other countries to use potentially large quantities of 

high-enriched uranium in their own space programs. 

And that is why I am introducing an amendment today to require that the space nuclear power report include a cost analysis 

of the use of high-enriched uranium versus low-enriched uranium 

in power generation and other space applications, including surface 

power and in space propulsion. This cost analysis should include 

the long-term and especially the security-related costs of the highenriched versus low-enriched uranium. This I think will help Congress understand the true costs of these different nuclear power 

sources. 

Thank you, and—for your consideration of this amendment, and 

I urge all of my colleagues to support it. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Foster. I’ll recognize myself to 

speak on the amendment. 

And I want to say to the gentleman from Illinois, as well as other 

Members of the Committee, initially, I was going to oppose this 

amendment because of its being submitted late and being concerned about the process. I know the Ranking Member and others 

have made comments about the process on the larger bill, but 

again, in an effort at comity and bipartisanship today, we’re going 

to overlook the process and I endorse the gentleman’s amendment. 

Is there anyone else—the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Babin, is 

recognized. 

Mr. BABIN. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I appreciate this amendment from Mr. Foster. We have conducted a number of hearings on this very issue, and I support this 

amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you, Mr. Babin. 

The gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Norman, is recognized. 

Mr. NORMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is there a financial impact on this study, and who would the study actually go to? I yield 

back. 
495 

Chairman SMITH. Does the gentleman from Illinois want to respond? 

Mr. FOSTER. Well, eventually Congress. I mean, that’s a decision 

we have to make. This is a decision that is—will be partly economic 

and partly due to national security and ultimately global security. 

You know, there’s—it is almost always true that using high-enriched uranium by itself from an engineering point of view will be 

a less-expensive alternative. However, there are real secondary 

costs and, you know, you have to guard high-enriched uranium 

really carefully because a terrorist group that gets their hands on 

high-enriched uranium can unfortunately quite easily make a nuclear weapon. 

And so that if you go to high-enriched uranium facility, at least 

in the United States, you go through many levels of barbed wire 

and personal ID and all this. All of those costs will have to be absorbed by any future mission that contemplates using high-enriched uranium for space applications. And I think that’s—that 

cost—you know, if you visit these facilities, there’s an impressive 

number of people that draw their salaries protecting the high-enriched uranium from potential terrorist attack. 

And I just—when ultimately Congress makes that decision, we 

should appreciate the secondary costs of that decision and I think 

work hard on engineering and solutions using low-enriched uranium. 

Chairman SMITH. Mr. Norman, do you yield back the balance of 

your time? Does that satisfy you? OK, good. 

The gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson, is recognized. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to voice 

that I support the gentleman from Illinois’ amendment, Dr. Foster. 

He raised this issue during the hearing with NASA’s Acting Administrator, and I want to commend you for following through because this is the next sensible step, and I thank him. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

If there’s no further discussion, the question is on the Foster 

amendment. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

We will now go to our last amendment to be offered by the gentleman from California, Mr. Knight, and he is recognized for that 

purpose. 

Mr. KNIGHT. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have an amendment at the 

desk. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 5503 offered by Mr. Knight of 

California. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman from California is recognized. 

Mr. KNIGHT. Mr. Chairman, very simply, as Mr. Perlmutter always has his bumper sticker of 2033, I think we should have a new 

bumper sticker because we are embarking on a new demonstrator. 

It’s the low-boom flight demonstrator, which will show that we can 

fly over land supersonic and not have the great big boom that everybody is accustomed to. 
496 

So if we’re going to do that and we are going to put people into 

airliners at some point and go over Mach 1, then we must make 

sure that we have all the infrastructure and the chase plane availability out at the test facility so that we can get through this program and be flying supersonic at some point. All of us who fly two 

times a week I’m sure are very interested in this, and a low-boom 

supersonic demonstrator will be something that we will all—all 

Americans will use at some point. 

So my amendment is very clear. Just make sure that we have 

the operational and testing infrastructure there and the availability of the chase planes for the low-boom supersonic demonstrator. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Knight. We may have a little 

bit of problem getting that on a bumper sticker because the most 

succinct description I can come up with is ‘‘boom-less supersonic,’’ 

but that that may not be bad if people know what we’re talking 

about. 

I support the gentleman’s amendment, appreciate his offering 

that. Is there anyone else who wishes to be heard on the amendment? 

The gentleman—— 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Let me go to Mr. McNerney and then to 

the gentleman from California. Mr. McNerney. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. I just wanted to ask the gentleman from California, most often when you see an amendment, it tells you where 

it goes in the bill. I don’t see any references in here. Is that settled 

in some way? 

Mr. KNIGHT. Yes, I believe that is settled. It’ll go into—— 

Chairman SMITH. It’ll be under the aeronautics title. 

Mr. KNIGHT [continuing]. The aeronautics part of that. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. We should have—thank you for that clarification. It will go under the aeronautics title. We’ll—— 

Mr. KNIGHT. Yes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, we’ll amend the amendment 

to make that clear. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. OK. I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. And who else wanted to be recognized? 

OK. The gentleman from California, Mr.—— 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Knight, I’m very pleased that this 

amendment has been offered. A lot of times we shortchange the 

aeronautics end of all of this, and this I think is really significant 

in the fact that if America is going to be a—not just a space power 

but the No. 1 aviation and aeronautics power in the world and 

where we’re going to sell our future aircraft, we need to have this 

type of fundamental research that’s being done. So I commend my 

colleague for this, and future aerospace workers throughout the 

United States will thank him as well. God bless. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher. 

If there’s no further discussion, all in favor of the Knight amendment, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. 
497 

We are now going to proceed with the recorded vote that was 

postponed on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter. It’s number 28. The ayes prevailed by voice 

vote, but a recorded vote was requested, and the clerk will call the 

roll. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith? 

Chairman SMITH. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith votes aye. 

Mr. Lucas? 

Mr. LUCAS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lucas votes aye. 

Mr. Rohrabacher? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Rohrabacher votes aye. 

Mr. Brooks? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Hultgren? 

Mr. HULTGREN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Hultgren votes aye. 

Mr. Posey? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Massie? 

Mr. MASSIE. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Massie votes aye. 

Mr. Bridenstine? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Knight? 

Mr. KNIGHT. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Knight votes aye. 

Mr. Babin? 

Mr. BABIN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Babin votes aye. 

Mrs. Comstock? 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr.—Mrs. Comstock votes aye. 

Mr. Loudermilk? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Abraham? 

Mr. ABRAHAM. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Abraham votes aye. 

Mr. Webster? 

Mr. WEBSTER. Maybe. 

The CLERK. Mr. Webster votes aye? 

Mr. WEBSTER. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Webster votes yes. 

Mr. Banks? 

Mr. BANKS. Nay. 

The CLERK. Mr. Banks votes nay. 

Mr. Biggs? 

Mr. BIGGS. Nay. 

The CLERK. Mr. Biggs votes nay. 

Mr. Marshall? 
498 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Dunn? 

Mr. DUNN. Yes. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Dunn votes aye. 

Mr. Higgins? 

Mr. HIGGINS. Nay. 

The CLERK. Mr. Higgins votes nay. 

Mr. Norman? 

Mr. NORMAN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Norman votes nay. 

Ms. Johnson? 

Ms. JOHNSON. Excuse me. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson votes aye. 

Ms. Lofgren? 

Ms. LOFGREN. Yes. 

The CLERK. Ms. Lofgren votes aye. 

Mr. Lipinski? 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lipinski votes aye. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

Ms. BONAMICI. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Bonamici votes aye. 

Mr. Bera? 

Mr. BERA. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Bera votes aye. 

Ms. Esty? 

Ms. ESTY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Esty votes aye. 

Mr. Veasey? 

Mr. VEASEY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Veasey votes aye. 

Mr. Beyer? 

Mr. BEYER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Beyer votes aye. 

Ms. Rosen? 

Ms. ROSEN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Rosen votes aye. 

Mr. McNerney? 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. McNerney votes aye. 

Mr. Perlmutter? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Perlmutter votes aye. 

Mr. Tonko? 

Mr. TONKO. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Tonko votes aye. 

Mr. Foster? 

Mr. FOSTER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Foster votes aye. 

Mr. Takano? 

Mr. TAKANO. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Takano votes aye. 

Ms. Hanabusa? 

Ms. HANABUSA. Aye. 
499 

The CLERK. Ms. Hanabusa votes aye. 

Mr. Crist? 

Mr. CRIST. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Crist votes aye. 

Chairman SMITH. The—before the clerk reports, the gentleman 

from Kentucky, Mr. Massie, is recognized. 

Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, how am I recorded? 

Chairman SMITH. How is Mr. Massie recorded? 

The CLERK. Mr. Massie is recorded as voting aye. 

Mr. MASSIE. I’d like to be recorded as nay. 

The CLERK. Mr. Massie votes nay. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Posey? 

Mr. POSEY. Yes. 

Chairman SMITH. Votes aye. OK. The clerk will report when she 

is ready. 

The CLERK. Mr. Chairman, 27 Members voted aye, 5 Members 

voted nay. 
500 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY -11Sth Full Committee Roll Call 

Working Quorum: 13 

DATE: 04/17/2018 

Bill: H.R. 5503 

ROLL CALL NO. 1 

Amendment Sponsor: Mr. Perlmutter (D-CO) 

MEMBER AYE 

1 Mr. SMITH, Chair- TX X 

2 Mr. LUCAS - OK ** X 

3 Mr. ROHRABACHER- CA X 

4 Mr. BROOKS - AL 

5 Mr. HULTGREN - /L X 

6 Mr. POSEY FL X 

7 Mr. MASSIE- KY 

8 Mr. BRIDENSTINE- OK 

9 Mr. WEBER- TX 

0 Mr. KNIGHT- CA X 

1 Mr. BABIN - TX X 

2 Mrs. COMSTOCK- VA X 

3 Mr. LOUDERMILK- GA 

14 Mr. ABRAHAM- LA X 

15 Mr. WEBSTER- FL X 

16 Mr. BANKS -IN 

17 Mr. BIGGS- AZ 

18 Mr. MARSHALL- KS 

19 Mr. DUNN- FL X 

20 Mr. HIGGINS- LA 

21 Mr. NORMAN- SC 

22 VACANT 

1 Ms. JOHNSON, Ranking- TX X 

2 Ms. LOFGREN - CA X 

3 Mr. LIPINSKI -IL X 

4 Ms. BONAMICI- OR X 

5 Mr.BERA-CA X 

6 Ms.ESTY-CT X 

7 Mr. VEASEY- TX X 

8 Mr. BEYER- VA X 

9 Ms. ROSEN- NV X 

10 Mr. MCNERNEY- CA X 

11 Mr. PERLMUTTER- CO X 

12 Mr. TONKO- NY X 

13 Mr. FOSTER -/L X 

14 Mr. TAKANO- CA X 

15 Ms. HANABUSA- HI X 

16 Mr. CRIST- FL X 

17 VACANT 

TOTALS 27 

**Vice Chair 

Reporting Quorum: 20 

AMENDMENT NO. 028 

PASSED 

NO 

I 

X 

I 

X 

X 

X 

X 

5 

OTVOTING 
501 

Chairman SMITH. The amendment—the ayes have it, and the 

amendment is agreed to. 

A reporting quorum being present, I move that the Committee on 

Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 5503, as amended, to 

the House with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 5503 to the House, 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, could we have a recorded vote? 

Chairman SMITH. A recorded vote has been requested, and the 

clerk will call the roll. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith? 

Chairman SMITH. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith votes aye. 

Mr. Lucas? 

Mr. LUCAS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lucas votes aye. 

Mr. Rohrabacher? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Rohrabacher votes aye. 

Mr. Brooks? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Hultgren? 

Mr. HULTGREN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Hultgren votes aye. 

Mr. Posey? 

Mr. POSEY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Posey votes aye. 

Mr. Massie? 

Mr. MASSIE. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Massie votes aye. 

Mr. Bridenstine? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber? 

Mr. WEBER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber votes aye. 

Mr. Knight? 

Mr. KNIGHT. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Knight votes aye. 

Mr. Babin? 

Mr. BABIN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Babin votes aye. 

Mrs. Comstock? 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Comstock votes aye. 

Mr. Loudermilk? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Abraham? 

Mr. ABRAHAM. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Abraham votes aye. 

Mr. Webster? 

Mr. WEBSTER. Aye. 
502 

The CLERK. Mr. Webster votes aye. 

Mr. Banks? 

Mr. BANKS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Banks votes aye. 

Mr. Biggs? 

Mr. BIGGS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Biggs votes aye. 

Mr. Marshall? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Dunn? 

Mr. DUNN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Dunn votes aye. 

Mr. Higgins? 

Mr. HIGGINS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Higgins votes aye. 

Mr. Norman? 

Mr. NORMAN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Norman votes aye. 

Ms. Johnson? 

Ms. JOHNSON. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson votes aye. 

Ms. Lofgren? 

Ms. LOFGREN. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Lofgren votes nay. 

Mr. Lipinski? 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lipinski votes aye. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

Ms. BONAMICI. Nay. 

The CLERK. Ms. Bonamici votes nay. 

Mr. Bera? 

Mr. BERA. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Bera votes aye. 

Ms. Esty? 

Ms. ESTY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Esty votes aye. 

Mr. Veasey? 

Mr. VEASEY. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Veasey votes aye. 

Mr. Beyer? 

Mr. BEYER. Nay. 

The CLERK. Mr. Beyer votes nay. 

Ms. Rosen? 

Ms. ROSEN. Nay. 

The CLERK. Ms. Rosen votes nay. 

Mr. McNerney? 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. McNerney votes aye. 

Mr. Perlmutter? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Perlmutter votes aye. 

Mr. Tonko? 

Mr. TONKO. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Tonko votes nay. 
503 

Mr. Foster? 

Mr. FOSTER. Nay. 

The CLERK. Mr. Foster votes nay. 

Mr. Takano? 

Mr. TAKANO. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Takano votes nay. 

Ms. Hanabusa? 

Ms. HANABUSA. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Hanabusa votes aye. 

Mr. Crist? 

Mr. CRIST. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Crist votes aye. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report. 

The CLERK. Mr. Chairman, 26 Members voted aye, 7 Members 

voted nay. 

Chairman SMITH. The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 
504 

COMMITIEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY -1151

h 

Full Committee Roll Call 

Working Quorum: 13 Reporting Quorum: 20 

DATE: 04/17/2018 

Bill: H.R. 5503 

ROLL CALL NO. 2 

MEMBER 

1 Mr. SMITH, Chair- TX 

2 Mr. LUCAS - OK ** 

3 Mr. ROHRABACHER- CA 

4 Mr. BROOKS - AL 

5 Mr. HULTGREN - IL 

6 Mr. POSEY- FL 

7 Mr. MASSIE- KY 

8 Mr. BRIDENSTINE - OK 

9 Mr. WEBER- TX 

10 Mr. KNIGHT - CA 

11 Mr. BABIN- TX 

12 Mrs. COMSTOCK- VA 

13 Mr. LOUDERMILK- GA 

14 Mr. ABRAHAM -LA 

15 Mr. WEBSTER- FL 

16 Mr. BANKS- IN 

17 Mr. BIGGS - AZ 

18 Mr. MARSHALL- KS 

19 Mr. DUNN-FL 

20 Mr. HIGGINS - LA 

21 Mr. NORMAN - SC 

22 VACANT 

1 Ms. JOHNSON, Ranking- TX 

2 Ms. LOFGREN - CA 

3 Mr. LIPINSKI-IL 

4 Ms. BONAMICI- OR 

5 Mr.BERA-CA 

6 Ms. ESTY-CT 

7 Mr. VEASEY- TX 

8 Mr. BEYER- VA 

9 Ms. ROSEN - NV 

10 Mr. MCNERNEY - CA 

11 Mr. PERLMUTTER- CO 

12 Mr. TONKO- NY 

13 Mr. FOSTER- IL 

14 Mr. TAKANO- CA 

15 Ms. HANABUSA- HI 

16 Mr. CRIST- FL 

17 VACANT 

TOTALS 

•• Vice Chair 

FINAL PASSAGE 

PASSED 

AYE NO PRESENT 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

26 7 

NOT VOTING 
505 

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

H.R. 5503 is ordered reported to the House. I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any necessary technical and 

conforming changes. Without objection, so ordered. 

Before we adjourn, real quickly, I thank Members for their participation. We had a great turnout today. And I thank those who 

decided to vote aye in favor of this bipartisan bill, which I hope and 

expect will increase its prospects of being enacted. So I thank everyone for their participation regardless. 

If there’s no further discussion, that completes our business, and 

this concludes the Science Committee markup. Without objection, 

the Committee stands adjourned, and Alden is going to come up 

here and hit the gavel for me. 

[Whereupon, at 12:21 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(507) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 5509, AMENDMENT ROSTER, H.R. 5503, AMENDMENT ROSTER
508 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\1MTA_002.XML 

115TH CONGRESS H R 

2D SESSION 

• • 

(Origin~tl Signature of Member) 

To direct the National Science Foundation to pro;~de grants for research 

about STEM education approaches and the STEM-related workforce, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

M . introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on------------

A BILL 

To direct the National Science Foundation to provide grants 

for research about STEM education approaches and the 

STEM-related workforce, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of Amm·ica in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Innovations in MenS taring, Training, and Apprenticeships Act". 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds the following: 

g:\VHLC\041218\041218.062.xml 

April12, 2018 (10:51 a.m.) 

(688413110) 
509 

G:\CMTE\SOI5\SCIENCE\IMfA_002.XML 

2 

(1) To remam competitive m the global econ2 omy, foster greater innovation, and provide a foun3 dation for shared prosperity, the United States 

4 needs a workforce with the right mix of skills to 

5 meet the diverse needs of the economy. 

6 (2) Evidence indicates that the returns on m7 vestments in technical skills in the labor market are 

8 strong when students successfully complete their 

9 training and gain credentials sought by employers. 

IO (3) The responsibility for developing and susII taining a skilled technical workforce is fragmented 

I2 across many groups, including educators; students; 

I3 workers; employers; Federal, State, and local governI4 ments; labor organizations; and civic associations. 

I5 Such groups need to be able to coordinate and coI6 operate successfully with each other. 

I7 ( 4) Coordination among students, community 

I8 colleges, secondary and post-secondary institutions, 

I9 and employers would improve educational outcomes. 

20 (5) Promising experiments currently underway 

2I may guide innovation and reform, but scalability of 

22 some of those experiments has not yet been tested. 

23 (6) Evidence suggests that integration of aca24 demic education, technical training, and hands-on 

25 work experience improves outcomes and return on 

g:\VHLC\041218\041218.062.xml 

Apri112, 2018 (1 0:51 a.m.) 

(688413110) 
510 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\IMT A_002.XML 

3 

1 investment for students m secondary and post-sec2 ondary education and for skilled technical workers in 

3 different career stages. 

4 (7) Outcomes show that mentoring can increase 

5 STEM student engagement and the rate of comple6 tion of STEM post-secondary degrees. 

7 SEC. 3. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION STEM INNOVA8 TION AND APPRENTICESHIP GRANTS. 

9 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.-The Director of the National 

10 Science Foundation shall award competitive grants to eli11 gible applicants in accordance with this section. 

12 (b) COORDINATION.-In carrying out this section, the 

13 Director shall consult and cooperate with the programs 

14 and policies of other relevant Federal agencies to avoid 

15 duplication with, and enhance the effectiveness of, the pro16 vision of grants under this section. 

17 (c) GRA.t'iTS l:<'OR AsSOCIATE DEGREE PROGRAMS IN 

18 STEM FIELDS.-

19 (1) IN GENERAl>.-The Director of the National 

20 Science Foundation shall award competitive grants 

21 to community colleges to develop or improve asso22 ciate degree and certificate programs in STEM 

23 fields in which there is significant workforce demand 

24 in the region of the community college receiving the 

g:\VHLC\041218\041218.062.xml 

April12, 2018 (10:51 a.m.) 

(688413110) 
511 

G:\CMTE\SC\ I 5\SCIENCE\\MT A_002.XML 

4 

1 award and a need to strengthen the global competi2 tiveness of affected companies. 

3 (2) APPI~ICATION.-In considering applications 

4 for grants under paragraph (1), the Director shall 

5 prioritize6 (A) applicants that consist of a partnership 

7 between the applying community college and in8 dividual employers or an employer consortia, 

9 and may include a university or other organiza10 tion "\\ith demonstrated expertise in academic 

11 program development; 

12 (B) applications that demonstrate current 

13 and future workforce demand in occupations di14 rectly related to the proposed associate degree 

15 or certificate program. 

16 (C) applications that include commitments 

17 by the partnering employers or employer con18 sortia to offer apprenticeships, internships or 

19 other applied learning opportunities to students 

20 enrolled in the proposed associate degree pro21 gram; and 

22 (D) applications that include outreach 

23 plans and goals for recruiting and enrolling 

24 women and other historically underrepresented 

g:\VHLC\04121B\041218.062.xml 

April12, 2018 (10:51 a.m.) 

(688413110) 
512 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\1MTA_002.XML 

5 

1 individuals in STE.NI studies and careers in the 

2 proposed associate degree program. 

3 (3) FUNDING.-The National Science Founda4 tion shall devote not less than $20,000,000 to 

5 awards described in this subsection, which shall in6 elude not less than $5,000,000 for each of fiscal 

7 years 2018 through 2021, subject to the availability 

8 of appropriations, to come from amounts made avail9 able for the Education and Human Resources Direc10 to rate. This subsection shall be carried out using 

11 funds otherwise appropriated by law after the date 

12 of enactment of this Act. 

13 (d) GRANTS FOR STEM DEGREE AI'PijiED LEARN14 ING 0PPOR'fUl\TJTIES.-

15 (1) IN GENERAL.-The Director of the National 

16 Science Foundation shall award competitive grants 

17 to universities partnering with employers or em18 ployer consortia that commit to offering apprentiee19 ships, internships, research opportunities, or applied 

20 learning experiences to enrolled university students 

21 in identified four-year S'l'EM degree programs. 

22 (2) APPLICATION.-In considering applications 

23 for grants under paragraph (1), the Director shall 

24 prioritizeg:\VHLC\041218\041218.082.xml 

April12, 2018 (10:51 a.m.) 

(688413110) 
513 

G:\CMTE\SOI5\SCIENCE\IMTA_002.XML 

6 

(A) applicants that consist of a partnership 

2 between3 (i) the applying university; and 

4 (ii) individual employers or an em5 ployer consortia; 

6 (B) applications that demonstrate current 

7 and future workforce demand in occupations di8 rectly related to selected STEM fields; and 

9 (C) applications that include outreach 

10 plans and goals for recruiting and enrolling 

11 women and other populations historically under12 represented in STEM. 

13 (3) FUNDING.-The National Science Founda14 tion shall devote not less than $10,000,000 to 

15 awards described in this subsection, which shall in16 elude not less than $2,500,000 for each of fiscal 

17 years 2018 through 2021, subject to the availability 

18 of appropriations, to come from amounts made avail19 able for the Education and Human Resources Direc20 torate. This subsection shall be carried out using 

21 funds otherwise appropriated by law after the date 

22 of enactment of this Act. 

23 (e) GRAl'JTS F'OR CoMPUTER-BASED A..'\'D ONLINE 

24 STEM EDUCATION COURSES.-

g:\VHLC\04121 8\041218.062.xml 

Aprtl12, 2018 (10:51 a.m.) 

(688413110) 
514 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SC1ENCE\1MTA_002.XML 

7 

(1) IN GENERAl,.-The Director of the National 

2 Science Foundation shall award competitive grants 

3 to institutions of higher education or nonprofit orga4 nizations to conduct research on student outcomes 

5 and determine best practices and scalability of corn6 puter-based and online courses for technical skills 

7 training. 

8 (2) RESEARCH AREAS.-The research areas eli9 gible for funding under this subsection may in10 elude11 (A) post-secondary courses for technical 

12 training for STEM occupations; 

13 (B) improving high-school level vocational 

14 training in STEM subjects; 

15 (C) encouraging and sustaining interest 

16 and achievement levels in STEM subjects 

17 among women and other populations histori18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:\VHLC\041218\041218.062.xml 

April12, 2018 (10:51 a.m.) 

cally underrepresented m STEM studies and 

careers; and 

(D) combining computer-based and online 

STEM education and training with traditional 

mentoring and other mentoring arrangements, 

apprenticeships, internships, and other applied 

learning opportunities. 

(688413110) 
515 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\1MTA_002.XML 

8 

1 (3) FUNDING.-The National Science Founda2 tion shall devote not less than $10,000,000 to 

3 awards described in this subsection, which shall in4 elude not less than $2,500,000 for each of fiscal 

5 years 2018 through 2021, subject to the availability 

6 of appropriations, to come from amounts made avail7 able for the Education and Human Resources Direc8 torate. This subsection shall be carried out using 

9 funds otherwise appropriated by law after the date 

10 of enactment of this Act. 

11 SEC. 4. RESEARCH ON EFFICIENCY OF SKILLED TECH12 NICAL LABOR MARKETS. 

13 (a) EI<'FICIENCY <W SKu,r,ED TECHNICAl, LABOR 

14 MARKETS.-The Directorate of Social, Behavioral & Eco15 nomic Sciences of the National Science I<~oundation, in co16 ordination with the Secretary of Labor, shall support re17 search that improves the efficiency of skilled technical 

18 labor markets in the United States, ineluding research on 

19 labor market analysis innovations, data and information 

20 sciences, electronic information tools and methodologies, 

21 and metrics. 

22 (b) COMPARISON OF UNITED STATES WORK23 FORCE.-

24 (1) RESEARCH.-The National Science Founda25 tion shall commission research that compares and 

g:\VHLC\041218\041218.062.xml 

April12, 2018 (10:51 a.m.) 

(688413110) 
516 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\IMT A_002.XML 

9 

1 contrasts skilled technical workforce development be2 tween the United States and other developed coun3 tries, including the diYersity of skilled technical and 

4 professional workforces, to the extent feasible. 

5 (2) REPOR'r.-Not later than 3 years after the 

6 date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the 

7 National Science Foundation shall submit to Con8 gress a report on the results of the study under 

9 paragraph (1). 

10 (c) SKII,LED TECHNICAL WORKFORCE.-

11 (1) REVIEW.-The National Center for Science 

12 and Engineering Statistics of the National Science 

13 Foundation shall consult and eoordinate with other 

14 relevant Federal statistieal agencies to explore the 

15 feasibility of expanding its surveys to include the col16 lection of objeetive data on the skilled technical 

17 workforce. 

18 (2) REPORT.-Not later than 1 year after the 

19 date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the 

20 National Scienee Foundation shall submit to Con21 gress a report containing the progress made in ex22 panding the National Center for Seience and Engi23 neering Statistics surveys to include the skilled tech24 nical workforce. Such report shall include a plan for 

25 multi-agency collaboration in order to effect data 

g:\VHLC\0412181041218.062.xml 

April12, 2018 (10:51 a.m.) 

(688413110) 
517 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\IMT A_002.XML 

10 

1 collection and reporting of data on the skilled tech2 nical workforce. 

3 SEC. 5. SPENDING LIMITATION. 

4 No additional funds are authorized to be appro5 priated to carry out this Act and the amendments made 

6 by this Aet, and this Aet and such amendments shall be 

7 earried out using amounts otherwise available for such 

8 purpose. 

9 SEC. 6. EVALUATION AND REPORT. 

10 (a) EVALUATION.-

11 (1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 2 years after 

12 the date of enaetment of this Act, the Director of 

13 the Foundation shall evaluate the grants and pro14 grams provided under this Aet. 

15 (2) REQ1JIREMENTS.-In eonducting the evalua16 tion under paragraph (1), the Director shall use a 

17 common set of benchmarks and assessment tools to 

18 identify best practices and materials developed or 

19 demonstrated by the research conducted pursuant to 

20 such grants and programs. 

21 (b) REPORT ON EVAI,UATIONS.-Not later than 180 

22 days after the completion of the evaluation under sub23 section (a), the Director of the Foundation shall submit 

24 to Congress and make widely available to the public a re25 port that includesg:\VHLC\041218\041218.062.xml 

April12, 2018 (10:51 a.m.) 

(688413110) 
518 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\IMT A_002.XML 

11 

1 (1) the results of the evaluation; and 

2 (2) any recommendations for administrative 

3 and legislative action that could optimize the effec4 tiveness of the grants and programs under this Act. 

5 (c) CONSULTATION.-In carrying out this section, the 

6 Director of the Foundation shall consult the programs and 

7 policies of other relevant Federal agencies to avoid dupli8 cation with, and enhance the effectiveness of, the grants 

9 and programs under this Act. 

10 SEC. 7. DEFINITIONS. 

11 In this Act: 

12 (1) STEM.-Theterm "STEM" means science, 

13 technology, engineering, and mathematics, including 

14 computer science. 

15 (2) COMMUNITY COLLEGE.-The term "commu16 nity college" has the meaning given the term "junior 

17 and community college" in section 312 of the Higher 

18 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1058). 

19 (3) INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.-The 

20 term "institution of higher education" has the 

21 meaning given such term in section 101(a) of the 

22 Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 100l(a)). 

23 ( 4) REGION.-The term "region" means a labor 

24 market area, as such term is defined in section 3 of 

g:\VHLC\041218\041218.082.xml 

April12, 2018 (10:51 a.m.) 

(688413110) 
519 

G:\CMTE\SOI5\SCIENCE\IMTA_002.XML 

12 

1 the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (29 

2 U.S.C. 3102). 

3 (5) SKILLED TECHNICAl, WORKFORCE.-The 

4 term "skilled technical workforce" means workers 

5 with high school diplomas and two-year technical 

6 training or certifications who employ significant lev7 els of STElVI knowledge in their jobs. 

8 (6) UNIVERSITY.-The term "university" 

9 means a 4-year institution of higher education, as 

10 defined in section 101(a) of the Higher Education 

11 Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. lOOl(a). 

g:\VHLC\041218\041218.082.xml 

April12, 2018 (10:51 a.m.) 

(688413110) 
520 

G:\M\15\BONAM1\BONAMI_070.XML 

.AMENDMENT TO H.R. 

OFFERED BY Ms. BONAMICI OF OREGON 

Page 4, line 11, insert ", including expertise in integrating art and design into STEM fields" after "development". 

g:\VHLC\041418\041418.007.xml 

April14, 2018 (11:00 a.m.) 

(69073211) 
521 

G:\M\15\BONAMl\BONAMI_071.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5509 

OFFERED BY Ms. BONAMICI OF OREGON 

Page 4, line 8, insert ", or industry or sector partnerships" after "employer consortia". 

Page 4, line 18, insert ", or industry or sector partnerships," before "to offer apprenticeships". 

Page 5, line 18, insert ", or industry or sector partnerships," before "that commit to offering". 

Page 6, line 5, insert ", or industry or sector partnerships" after "consortia". 

g:IVHLC\041618\041618.412.xml 

April 16, 2018 (6:25 p.m.) 

(69073312) 
522 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

115TH CONGRESS H R 2D SESSION 

• • 

(Original Signature of l\Iember) 

To authorize the programs of the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration for fiscal years 2018 and 2019, and for other pnrpost>s. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

Mr. BABIN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on 

A BILL 

To authorize the programs of the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration for fiscal years 2018 and 2019, 

and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of RepTesenta2 tives of the United States of AmeTica in CongTess assembled, 

3 SECTION I. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

4 (a) SHORT TITLE.-This Act may be cited as the 

5 "National Aeronautics and Space Administration Author6 ization Act of 2018". 

7 (b) TABLE 01<' CONTENTS.-The table of contents for 

8 this Act is the following: 

g:IVHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

Aplil13, 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 
523 

G:\CMTE\Sal5\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

2 

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 

Sec. 2. Definitions. 

TITLE I-AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS 

Sec. 101. Fiscal year 2018. 

See. 102. F'iscal year 2019. 

TITLE II-HUJIIlAN EXPI,ORATION 

Sec. 201. Space facilities beyond low-Earth orbit. 

Sec. 202. ISS transition. 

Sec. 20:1. Human spaceflight research. 

Sec. 20±. Critical path redundancy for human spaceflight. 

Sec. 205. Space suits. 

Sec. 301. 

Sec. 302. 

Sec. 303. 

Sec. 304. 

Sec. 305. 

Sec. 306. 

TITLE III-SCIENCE 

Subtitle A-Earth Science 

Reimbursable basis for development of sensors and instruments. 

Earth observations study. 

Land imaging. 

Landsat data policy. 

Earth science missions. 

Goddard Institute for Space Studies Inspector General report. 

Subtitle B-AstronomJ' and Astrophysics 

Sec. 311. Search for the origin, evolution, distribution, aml future of life in the 

universe. 

Sec. 312. Wide-Field Infrat·ed Space Telescope. 

Subtitle C-Pianetary Science 

Sec. 321. Near-Earth Object SurYey. 

Sec. 322. Space nuclear power. 

Sec. 401. 

Sec. 402. 

Sec. 403. 

Sec. 404. 

Sec. 405. 

TITLE IV-AERONAUTICS 

Snpersonie research. 

lJ nmanne<l aircraft systems researeh. 

21st Centmy Aeronautics Research Capabilities Initiative. 

Experimental plane program. 

H;n>ersonie Technology pro;ject. 

TITLE V-COl\ll\IERCIAL 

Sec. 501. Commercial supply of space products. 

Sec. 502. Commercial provision of services. 

Sec. 503. Commercial in-space infrastructure. 

Sec. 504. Preference for launch vehicles manufactured in the United States. 

Sec. 505. Studies on industrial base. 

Sec. 506. Spectrum coordination. 

Sec. 507. Enhanced-usc leasing. 

Sec. 508. Satellite servicing technologies. 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.Q17.xml 

April13. 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 

TITLE VI-POLICY 
524 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACEINASA2018_002.XML 

3 

See. 601. NASA-funded institutes. 

Sec. 602. Baseline and eost controls. 

Se<l. 603. Reports to Congress. 

Sec. 604. International technical and operational standards. 

See. 605. NASA contractor responsibility watch list. 

Sec. 606. Human space exploration risk. 

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

2 In this Act: 

3 (1) ADl\nmSTRATOR.-The term "Adminis4 trator" means the Administrator of NASA. 

5 (2) CIS-LUNAR SPACE.-The term "cis-lunar 

6 space" means the region of space from the Earth 

7 out to and including the region around the surface 

8 of the Moon. 

9 (3) ISS.-The term "ISS" means the Iuter1 0 national Space Station. 

11 (4) NASA.-The term "NASA" means the Na12 tional Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

13 (5) NEAH-EARTH AS'rEHOID.-The term "near14 Earth asteroid" means an asteroid with a perihelion 

15 distance of less than 1.3 Astronomical Units from 

16 the Sun. 

17 (6) NEAR-EARTH OBJECT.-The term "near18 J;Jarth ohject" means an asteroid or comet with a 

19 perihelion distance of less than 1.3 Astronomical 

20 Units from the Sun. 

21 (7) NONPROFI'r ORGANIZATION.-The term 

22 "nonprofit organization" means an organization deg:\VHLC\04131 B\041318.D17.xm! 

April13, 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 
525 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

4 

1 termined by the Secretary of the Treasury to be an 

2 organization described in section 501(c)(3) of the 

3 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 

4 501(c)(3)) which is exempt from taxation under seeS tion 501(a) of such Code. 

6 (8) ORION.-The term "Orion" means the mul7 tipurpose crew vehicle described under section 303 

8 of the Kational Aeronautics and Space Administra9 tion Authorization Act of 2010 (42 TJ.S.C. 18323). 

10 (9) SPACE IoAU~CII SYSTEM.-The term "Space 

11 Launch System" has the meaning given the term in 

12 section 3 of the National Aeronautics and Space Ad13 ministration Authorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 

14 18302). 

15 TITLE I-AUTHORIZATION OF 

16 APPROPRIATIONS 

17 SEC. 101. FISCAL YEAR 2018. 

18 There are authorized to be appropriated to NASA for 

19 fiscal year 2018, $20,736,140,000, as follows: 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:IVHLC\0413161041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(1) For Science, $6,221,500,000, of which-

(A) $1,921,000,000 is for Earth Science; 

(B) $2,227,900,000 IS for Planetary 

Science; 

(C) $850,400,000 is for Astrophysics; 

(688711127) 
526 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA20 18_002.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

5 

(D) $533,700,000 is for the James Webb 

Space Telescope; and 

(E) $688,500,000 is for Heliophysics. 

(2) For Aeronautics, $685,000,000. 

(3) For Space Technology, $760,000,000. 

( 4) For Exploration, $4,790,000,000, of 

7 which8 (A) $1,350,000,000 is for Orion and asso9 ciated program and other necessary support; 

10 (B) $2,150,000,000 is for the Space 

11 Launch System and associated program and 

12 other necessary support; 

13 (C) $895,000,000 1s for Exploration 

14 Ground Systems; and 

15 (D) $395,000,000 1s for Exploration Re16 search and Development. 

17 (5) For Space Operations, $4,751,500,000. 

18 (6) For Edueation, $100,000,000, of which19 (A) $18,000,000 is for the Experimental 

20 Program to Stimulate Competitive Research; 

21 and 

22 (B) $40,000,000 is for the National Space 

23 Grant College and Fellowship Program. 

24 (7) For Safety, Security, and Mission Services, 

25 $2,826,900,000. 

g:IVHLC\0413181041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
527 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

6 

(8) For Construction and Environmental Com2 pliance and Restoration, $562,240,000. 

3 (9) !<'or Inspector General, $39,000,000. 

4 SEC. 102. FISCAL YEAR 2019. 

5 There are authorized to be appropriated to NASA for 

6 fiscal year 2019, $20,736,140,000, as follows: 

7 (1) For Deep Space E:x-ploration Systems, 

8 $4,929,000,000, of which9 (A) $4,040,000,000 is for Exploration Sys10 terns Development, of which11 (i) $2,150,000,000 is for Orion and 

12 associated program and other necessary 

13 support; 

14 (ii) $1,350,000,000 1s for the Space 

15 Launch System and associated program 

16 and other necessary support; and 

17 (iii) $540,000,000 is for Exploration 

18 Ground Systems; and 

19 (B) $889,000,000 is for Advanced Explo20 ration Systems, of which21 (i) $504,300,000 is for the Lunar Or22 bital Platform-Gateway and associated 

23 prof..rram and other necessary support; 

24 (ii) $116,500,000 is for Advaneed 

25 Cislunar and Surface Capabilities; and 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
528 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

7 

(iii) $268,200,000 is for Exploration 

2 Advanced Systems. 

3 (2) For Exploration and Hesearch Technology, 

4 $1,017,700,000, of which5 (A) $108,500,000 is for Early Stage Inno6 vation and Partnerships; 

7 (B) $216,500,000 if for Technology Matu8 ration, of which $75,000,000 is for nuclear fis9 sion and cryogenic fluid management develop10 ment; 

11 (C) $332,700,000 is for Technology Dem12 onstration. 

13 (D) $140,000,000 is for Human Hesearch 

14 Program; and 

15 (E) $205,000,000 1s for Small Business 

16 Innovation Hesearch and Small Business Tech17 nology Transfer. 

18 (3) For IJOw-Earlh Orbit and Spaceflight Oper19 ations, $4,624,600,000, of which20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April 13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(A) $1,462,200,000 lS for the International Space Station; 

(B) $2,108,700,000 is for Space Transportation; 

(C) $903,700,000 is for Space light Support; and 

(68871, 127) 
529 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

(D) $150,000,000 is for Commercial I.JOWEarth Orbit Development. 

( 4) F'or Science, $6,152,600,000, of which-

(A) $1,450,000,000 is for Earth Science; 

(B) $2,636,500,000 IS for Planetary 

Science; 

(C) $1,375,400,000 IS for Astrophysics; 

8 and 

9 (D) $690,700,000 is for Heliophysics. 

10 (5) :B'or Aeronautics, $685,000,000. 

11 (6) :B'or Education, $100,000,000, of which12 (A) $18,000,000 is for the Established 

13 Program to Stimulate Competitive Research; 

14 and 

15 (B) $40,000,000 is for Space Grant. 

16 (7) For Safety, Security, and Mission Services, 

17 $2,749,700,000. 

18 (8) For Construction and Environmental Com19 pliance and Restoration, $438,200,000. 

20 (9) For Inspector General, $39,300,000. 

21 TITLE II-HUMAN EXPLORATION 

22 SEC. 201. SPACE FACILITIES BEYOND LOW-EARTH ORBIT. 

23 (a) SI<JNSE OF CONGRESS.-It is the sense of Con24 gress that space facilities for use beyond low-Earth orbit 

25 play a significant role in NASA's long-term pursuit of its 

g:IVHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
530 

G:\CMTE\SC\ 15\SP ACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

9 

exploration goals under section 202(a) of the National 

2 Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act 

3 of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 18312(a)). 

4 (b) CHEWED AND CHE\Y-TENDED SPACE .F'ACILITIES 

5 REPORT.-

6 (1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 90 days after 

7 the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator 

8 shall submit to the Committee on Science, Space, 

9 and Technology of the House of Representatives and 

10 the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Trans11 portation of the Senate a report on the potential de12 velopment of space facilities for use beyond low13 Earth orbit. 

14 (2) CONTENTS.-The report required under 

15 paragraph (1) shall include a description of16 (A) how each such space facility can ad17 vance, enable, or complement human explo18 ration of the Solar System, indnding of the at19 mosphere and the surface of celestial bodies; 

20 (B) the role of the space facility as a stag21 ing, logistics, and operations hub in an explo22 ration architecture; 

23 (C) how the space facility could support 

24 the research, development, testing, validation, 

g:\VHLC\0413181041318.D17.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
531 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

10 

operation, and launch of space exploration systerns and technologies; 

(D) opportunities and strategies for commercial operation or public-private partnerships 

that protect taxpayer interests and foster competition; and 

(E) the role of such a space facility in 

making, developing, and refining the case for 

further crewed and uncrewed exploration investmcnts. 

11 SEC. 202. ISS TRANSITION. 

12 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds the follovving: 

13 (1) The ISS is a valuable national asset that 

14 can continue to produce worthwhile scientific re15 search and valuable technology. 

16 (2) The ISS mission should be to carry out 

17 microgravity research and development, research in 

18 support of deep space human exploration, and low19 Earth orbit commercialization. 

20 (3) The ISS is the best platform currently 

21 available to conduct certain types of research needed 

22 for NASA's deep space human e:x.-ploration program 

23 with such research currently scheduled to be com24 pleted by the end of fiscal year 2024. 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2016 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 
532 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

11 

(4) The ISS transition report, submitted pursu2 ant to section 501ll(c)(2) of title 51, United States 

3 Code, provides an explanation of NASA's plans to 

4 foster the development of private industry capabili5 ties and private demand with a goal of ending direct 

6 NASA support for ISS operations by the end of fis7 cal year 2024. 

8 (5) The plans laid out in the ISS transition re9 port are conditionally flexible and require feedback 

10 to inform next steps. In addition, the feasibility of 

11 ending direct NASA support for ISS operations by 

12 the end of fiscal year 2024 is dependent on many 

13 factors, some of which are indeterminate until the 

14 Administration carries out the initial phases of the 

15 ISS transition plan. 

16 (6) The value of any in-space facility, such as 

17 the ISS, depends both on its contributions to further 

18 expansion of human presence throughout the solar 

19 system, pursuant to seetion 202 of the National Aer20 onautics and Space Administration Authorization 

21 Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 18812) and to making exist22 ing presence self-sustaining. 

23 (7) As the United States moves towards a com24 mitment to a human presence off the surface of the 

25 Earth, other Government agencies should seek to 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 
533 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

12 

benefit from and capitalize upon the ongoing human 

2 presence in space. 

3 (b) IN GENERAL.-The Administration shall support 

4 Johnson Space Center as a center of innovation and leadS ership in developing human operations, including surfaces 

6 of celestial bodies, beyond Earth, to the cis-lunar region, 

7 the Moon, Mars, and beyond. 

8 (c) ISS OPE&\TION.-

9 (1) IN GENERAL.-NASA shall continue oper10 ation of the International Space Station for such 

11 time as Congress authorizes its operations. 

12 (2) INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS.-NASA 

13 shall pursue international agreements to provide 

14 maximum flexibility for ISS utilization. 

15 (3) LOW-EARTH ORBIT.-NASA shall pursue a 

16 step-wise transition of low-Earth orbit human 

17 spaceflight operations from a Government-directed 

18 activity to a model where private industry is respon19 sible for how to meet and execute NASA's rcquire20 ments. 

21 (4) 'fRANSITION REPORT.-NASA shall carry 

22 out activities in fiscal year 2019 as proposed in the 

23 ISS transition report, delivered pursuant to section 

24 50111(c) of title 51, United States Code. 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
534 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA20 18_002.XML 

1 (d) REPORTING.-In addition to the biennial report2 ing requirement under section 50111(c) of title 51, United 

3 States Code, the Administrator shall brief the Committee 

4 on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Rep5 resentatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

6 and Transportation of the Senate quarterly, beginning on 

7 the date that is 3 months after the date of enactment of 

8 this Act, on the status of, and all progress, changes, and 

9 other developments related to carrying out the plans in 

10 the ISS transition report. 

11 (e) AUTHORIZED FUNDING.-Subject to the avail12 ability of appropriations, shall make available at least 

13 $150,000,000 for fiscal year 2019 for commercial low14 Earth orbit development out of the LEO and Spaceflight 

15 Operations account. 

16 SEC. 203. HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT RESEARCH. 

17 (a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-lt is the sense of Con18 gress that19 ( 1) the benefits derived from the peaceful use 

20 of space depend on the extent to which ground-based 

21 space infrastructure, facilities, and research are well22 integrated; and 

23 (2) NASA Johnson Space Center (hereinafter 

24 referred to as "JSC") has the expertise and facilities 

25 to support the development of the major technog:\VHLC\041318\041318.D17.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
535 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

14 

logical innovatious necessary to enable and support 

2 the nation's ongoing commitment to human 

3 spaceflight, exploration, and continued human pres4 ence in space. 

5 (b) JOHNSON SPACE CENTER RESEARCH 0FFICK6 (1) ESTABLISHl\iENT.-The Administrator shall 

7 establish a research office at JSC to build upon the 

8 Center's existing expertise in human space flight 

9 missions for future challenges. 

10 (2) RESEARCH DIRECTOR.-The head of the re11 search office shall be the research director, who shall 

12 report directly to the Director of JSC. 

13 (3) DUTIES.-The research director shall have, 

14 at a minimum, the following duties: 

15 (A) Oversee a research portfolio focused on 

16 human space flight. 

17 (B) Recommend infrastructure and equip18 ment necessary to carry out a research mission. 

19 (C) Oversee professional development and 

20 continuing education, as necessary and appro21 priate, for the civil workforce as the research 

22 and innovation focus of the center increases. 

23 (4) SCOPE OF RESEARCH.-The research office 

24 shall focus on aspects of research that are directly 

25 relevant to the endeavor of human space flight, ing:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
536 

G:\CMTE\SOI5\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

15 

eluding problems of human spaceflight and robotics 

2 supporting human space exploration. 

3 (5) SuPPORT l<'OR HUMAN SPACEFijiGHT AC4 TIVITIES.-JSC shall, consistent with its primary re5 sponsibilities to NASA and other goYernment cus6 tomers, elldeavor to make the fnllest possible use of 

7 its facilities and infrastructure to support all U.S. 

8 human spaceflight activities, including those of the 

9 private sector. 

10 (c) HI<JPORT.-Not later than 180 days after the en11 actment of this Act, NASA and JSC shall submit to the 

12 Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the 

13 House of Representatives and the Committee on Com14 merce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report 

15 on NASA's progress on, and other developments related 

16 to, carrying out the requirements of this section. 

17 (d) AUTHORIZED FUNDING.-Subject to the avail18 ability of appropriations, the Administrator shall make 

19 available at least $15,000,000 in fiscal year 2019 out of 

20 the Exploration Research and Technology account to carry 

21 out this section. 

22 SEC. 204. CRITICAL PATH REDUNDANCY FOR HUMAN 

23 SPACEFLIGHT. 

24 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds that NASA, in co25 operation with private sector and international partners, 

g;\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 
537 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

16 

has facilitated the development of a wide array of cargo 

2 and crew transportation options for operations in low3 Barth orbit and beyond. 

4 (b) SENSE OJi' CONGRESS.-lt is the sense of Con5 gress that the availability of a multitude of launch vehicles 

6 and crew and eargo vehieles provides critical path redun7 dancy. 

8 (e) LOGISTICAl. Al"JD TRfu'\TSPORT REDUNDANCY.-

9 Not later than 3 months after the date of the enactment 

10 of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the Com11 mittee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 

12 Senate and the Committee on Science, Space, and Teeh13 nology of the House of Representatives a report that con14 tains an evaluation of the suitability and performance, in15 eluding cost, reliability, and availability, of16 (1) all available crew and cargo vehicles for des17 tinations in low-Earth orbit, cis-lunar space, and be18 yond; and 

19 (2) all available launch vehicles that are capable 

20 of delivering more than 20 tons to, or beyond, low21 Earth orbit to support exploration and scientific 

22 missions, particularly to outer planets. 

23 SEC. 205. SPACE SIDTS. 

24 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds the following: 

g:\VHLC\04131 8\04131 8.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
538 

G:\CMTE\SC\!S\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

17 

1 (1) Space suits and associated extravehicular 

2 activity (in this section, referred to as "EVA") tech3 nologies are critical space exploration technologies. 

4 (2) The NASA civil service workforce at the 

5 Johnson Space Center possesses unique capabilities 

6 to integrate, design, and validate space suits and as7 sociated EVA technologies. 

8 (3) Maintaining a strong core competency in 

9 the design, development, manufacture, and operation 

10 of space suits and related technologies allows NASA 

11 to be an informed purchaser of competitively award12 ed commercial space suits and associated EVA tech13 nologies. 

14 (4) NASA should fully utilize the International 

15 Space Station by 2025 to test future space suits and 

16 associated EVA technologies to reduce risk and im1 7 prove safety. 

18 (b) SPACE SUITS.-

19 (1) IN GENERAh-NASA shall develop space 

20 suits and associated EVA technologies. 

21 (2) l\lANAGEMENT.-The Johnson Space Center 

22 shall manage the space suit and EVA programs of 

23 NASA. 

24 (3) PRIVATE SECTOR.-In carrying out this 

25 subsection, the Administrator may enter into agreeg:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 
539 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

18 

ments with the private sector as the Administrator 

2 considers appropriate. 

3 TITLE III-SCIENCE 

4 Subtitle A-Earth Science 

5 SEC. 301. REIMBURSABLE BASIS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF 

6 SENSORS AND INSTRUMENTS. 

7 Chapter 605 of title 51, United States Code, 1s 

8 amended by adding at the end the following: 

9 "§ 60507. Reimbursable basis for development of sen10 sors and instruments 

11 "Any work undertaken by the Administration for the 

12 benefit of another agency shall be conducted on a reim13 bursable basis that accounts for the full cost of the work, 

14 including work undertaken for the development of oper15 ational Earth seienee systems, including satellite, sensor, 

16 or instrument development, acquisition, and operations, as 

17 well as product development and data analysis.". 

18 {1) TECHNICAL Al\IENDl\fENT.-The table of 

19 sections for chapter 605 of title 51, United States 

20 Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol21 lowing: 

"60507. Reimbursable basis for development of sensors and instmments.". 

22 SEC. 302. EARTH OBSERVATIONS STUDY. 

23 Section 702 of the National Aeronautics and Space 

24 Administration Authorization Aet of 2010 ( 42 U.S.C. 

25 18371) is amendedg:\VHLC\041318\041318.Q17.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
540 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

19 

1 (1) by striking "The Director of" and inserting 

2 the following: 

3 "(a) IN GENER.AL.-'l'he Director of"; and 

4 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

5 "(b) CONSIDER.ATION.-In carrying out the strategic 

6 implementation plan nuder subsection (a), the Director 

7 shall take into account and im~orporate into such plan, as 

8 appropriate, purchasing Earth observation data and serv9 ices from the private sector or through public-private part10 nerships to meet Earth observation requirements.". 

11 SEC. 303. LAND IMAGING. 

12 (a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-lt IS the sense of Con13 gress that14 (1) the continuous collection and utilization of 

15 land remote sensing data from space are of major 

16 benefit in studying and understanding· human im17 pacts on the global environment, in managing the 

18 Earth's natural resources, in carrying out national 

19 security functions, and in planning and conducting 

20 many other activities of scientific, economic, and so21 cial importance; and 

22 (2) to the greatest extent practicable, the 

23 United States should foster the development of U.S. 

24 private sector remote sensing capabilities and anal25 yses that ean satisfy the public interest in long-term 

g:\VHLCI041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
541 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

20 

continuous collection of medium-resolution land re2 mote sensing data. 

3 (b) CONTJ:\'UOUS LAND REMOTE SENSING DATA 

4 COLLECTION.-

5 (1) IN GBNERAh-Subchapter IV of chapter 

6 601 of title 51, United States Code, is amended by 

7 adding at the end the following new section: 

8 "§ 60135. Continuous land remote sensing data collec9 

10 

11 to12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

tion 

"(a) Por~ICY.-It is the policy of the United States 

" ( 1) ensure, to the greatest extent practicable, 

the continuous collection of space-based, mediumresolution observations of the Earth's land cover; 

"(2) ensure that the collected data are made 

available in such ways as to facilitate the widest possible use; and 

"(3) to the gTeatest extent practicable, foster 

the development of U.S. private sector remote sensing capabilities and analyses that can satisfy the 

public interest in long-term continuous collection of 

medium-resolution land remote sensing data. 

23 "(b) COORDINATION.-The National Space Council, 

24 in consultation ·with other relevant Federal agencies, shall 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.D17.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 
542 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

21 

coordinate United States Government activities described 

2 under paragraphs (1) through (3) of subsection (a).". 

3 (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.-The table of 

4 sections for subchapter IV of chapter 601 of title 51, 

5 United States Code, is amended by adding at the 

6 end the following new section: 

"60Ja5. ContinuouB land remote Bensing data colleetion.". 

7 SEC. 304. LANDSAT DATA POLICY. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.-

9 (1) LIMITATION ON USE OF FUNDS.-No funds 

10 may be obligated or expended for Landsat 11 or any 

11 other subsequent Landsat system until the Adminis12 trator has completed a study assessing which aspects 

13 of Landsat system observations and associated 

14 science requirements can be provided by purchasing 

15 data from the private sector or through public-pri16 vate partnerships. 

17 (2) REPORT.-Not later than 1 year after the 

18 date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator 

19 shall transmit to the Committee on Science, Space, 

20 and Technology of the House of Hepresentatives and 

21 the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Trans22 portation of the Senate, a report containing the re23 suits of the study required under paragraph (1). 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
543 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

22 

(b) DEFINITION OF h'\NDSAT SYSTEM.-ln this sec2 tion, the term "Landsat system" has the meaning given 

3 that term in section 60101 of title 51, United States Code. 

4 SEC. 305. EARTH SCIENCE MISSIONS. 

5 The Administrator shall continue to restructure the 

6 Earth science portfolio of NASA to reduce overall costs, 

7 support innovative and sustainable programs and missions 

8 with commercial and international partners, and align 

9 with the recommendations of the National Academy of 

10 Sciences included in the publication published in 2018 till tied "Thriving on Our Changing Planet: A Decadal Strat12 egy for Earth Observation from Space" to ensure that the 

13 Earth science portfolio is focused on the highest priority 

14 missions for the science and applications communities 

15 within a balanced, comprehensive Earth science program. 

16 SEC. 306. GODDARD INSTITUTE FOR SPACE STUDIES IN17 SPECTOR GENERAL REPORT. 

18 Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 

19 of this Act, the Administrator shall transmit to the Com20 mittee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House 

21 of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, 

22 Science, and Transportation of the Senate, a report con23 taining the results of NASA's implementation of the ree24 ommendations identified in the report published by the 

25 NASA Office of Inspector General on April 5, 2018, titled 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(68871 1127) 
544 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

1 "NASA's Management GISS: The Goddard Institute for 

2 Space Studies". 

3 Subtitle B-Astronomy and 

4 Astrophysics 

5 SEC. 311. SEARCH FOR THE ORIGIN, EVOLUTION, DISTRffiU6 TION, AND FUTURE OF LIFE IN THE UNJ. 

7 VERSE. 

8 (a) PoucY.-Section 20102(d)(10) of title 51, 

9 United States Code, includes the search for life's origin, 

10 evolution, distribution, and future in the universe as an 

11 objective of U.S. aeronautical and space activities. 

12 (b) IN GENERAL.-NASA shall partner with the pri13 vate sector and philanthropic organizations to the max14 imum extent practicable to search for technosignatures, 

15 such as radio transmissions, in order to meet the NASA 

16 objective to search for life's origin, evolution, distribution, 

17 and future in the universe. 

18 (e) REPORT.-Not later than 90 days after the date 

19 of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit 

20 to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of 

21 the House of Representatives and the Committee on Com22 merce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report, 

23 produced in consultation with industry and academia, on 

24 all NASA programs, including partnerships \\~th the pri25 vate sector and philanthropic organizations, that cong:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April 13, 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(68871 1 127) 
545 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

24 

tribute to the search for life's origin, evolution, distribu2 tion, and future in the universe. 

3 (d) AUTHORIZED FUNDING.-Subject to the avail4 ability of appropriations, the Administrator shall make 

5 available at least $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 

6 2018 and 2019 for the search for technosignatures. 

7 SEC. 312. WIDE-FIELD INFRARED SPACE TELESCOPE. 

8 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds the following: 

9 (1) Concurrent flagship programs challenge sig10 nificantly NASA's program management capacity, 

11 especially during later stages of the program man12 agement process. 

13 (2) The vYide-Field Infrared Space Telescope 

14 (hereinafter referred to as "WFIRST") was can15 celled in the President's fiscal year 2019 budget re16 quest. 

17 (3) vVFIRST was funded in the amount of 

18 $150,000,000 in NASA's appropriation for fiscal 

19 year 2018. 

20 ( 4) Pursuant to direction in NASA's appropria21 tion for fiscal year 2018, NASA is conducting a pre22 liminary life-cycle cost estimate, including any addi23 tions needed to achieve Class A classification, along 

24 with a year-by-year breakout of development costs. 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.} 

(688711127} 
546 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

25 

( 5) Until such preliminary life-cycle cost esti2 mate is complete, Congress has insufficient informa3 tion to judge whether or not WFIRST should be au4 thorized to proceed in fiscal year 2019. 

5 (b) TOTAL COST.-The total formulation and devel6 opment cost, as such term is defined in section 30104 of 

7 title 51, United States Code, for the Wide-Field Infrared 

8 Space Telescope shall not exceed $3,200,000,000. 

9 (c) BUDGET.-Thc Administrator shall include in the 

10 budget for fiscal year 2020 a 5-year funding profile nec11 essary to achieve the goal in subsection (b). 

12 (d) LIMITATION.-The Administrator shall not pro13 cure a launch vehicle for the Wide-I<"'ield Infrared Space 

14 Telescope until the ,James Webb Space Telescope is oper15 ational in space. 

16 Subtitle C-Planetary Science 

17 SEC. 321. NEAR-EARTH OBJECT SURVEY. 

18 (a) Fl"-'DTNGS.-Congress finds the following: 

19 (1) The George E. Brown, Jr. Near-Earth Ob20 jeet Survey Act (Public Law 109-155) established 

21 the Near-Earth Object Survey program to detect, 

22 track, and catalogue the physical characteristics of 

23 near-Earth objects equal to or greater than 140 me24 ters in diameter in order to assess the threat of such 

25 objects to Earth. 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 
547 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

26 

(2) The goal of the Survey program 1s to 

2 achieve 90 percent completion of the near-Earth 

3 project catalogue (based on statistically predicted 

4 populations of near-Earth objects) not later than 15 

5 years after the date of the enactment of the George 

6 E. Brown, Jr. Near-Earth Object Survey Act. 

7 (3) NASA has been successful finding more 

8 than 90 percent of the near-Earth asteroids larger 

9 than one kilometer but has only found about 30 per10 cent of the near-Earth objects larger than 140 me11 ters. 

12 ( 4) The vast majority of near-Earth object dis13 coveries have been made by NASA-supported 

14 ground-based telescopic surveys. 

15 (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-lt is the sense of Con16 gress that17 ( 1 ) in order to meet the statutory requirements 

18 of the George E Brown, Jr. Near-Earth Object Snr19 vey Act (Public Law 109-155), a space-based tele20 scope mission should be fully funded and supported 

21 by NASA and carried out by the Planetary Defense 

22 Coordination Office; and 

23 (2) the space-based telescope Near-Earth Ob24 ject Camera mission, or a similar infrared telescope 

25 concept optimized for near-Earth object search and 

g:IVHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
548 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

27 

1 characterization, could discover and characterize 

2 most of the potentially hazardous asteroids that are 

3 near the Earth. 

4 SEC. 322. SPACE NUCLEAR POWER. 

5 (a) l<'INDING.-Congress finds that in-space nuclear 

6 fission power complements the use of Plutonium-238 radi7 oisotope thermoelectric generators (in this section referred 

8 to as "RTG") for spacecraft power needs. 

9 (b) POLICY.-It is the policy of the United States10 (1) to continue the development of in-space nu11 clear fission technolo~'Y, as necessary, for purposes 

12 inclnding13 (A) in-space power generation for advanced 

14 in-space propulsion; 

15 (B) onboard power generation to replace or 

16 supplement RTG systems; 

17 (C) power g'eneration on the surface of ce18 lestial bodies; 

19 (D) extraction and processing of in situ re20 sources; and 

21 (E) nuclear thermal and nuclear electric 

22 propulsion able to transport crew or cargo 

23 among· Earth and other celestial bodies much 

24 more rapidly than is practical with non-nuclear 

25 systems; 

g:\VHLC\04131 8\04131 8.017 .xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
549 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

28 

(2) that research and development of in-space 

2 nuclear fission power should be carried out as part 

3 of a portfolio that appropriately balances develop4 ment of power systems at different sizes and matu5 rities, with an emphasis on early development of ma6 ture, operational systems; and 

7 (3) that NASA should continually seek to 

8 streamline the process for space launch approval of 

9 nuclear materials, eliminate redundant and 

10 unneeded processes, and regularize the process for 

11 efficient, regular functioning, and toward that end, 

12 the Administrator should update the launch approval 

13 process and seek to establish a licensing process for 

14 private nuclear power sources in space. 

15 (c) SPACE NUCLEAR POWER REPORT.-

16 (1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 180 days 

17 after the date of enactment of this Act, the Adminis18 trator shall submit to the Committee on Science, 

19 Space, and Technology of the House of Representa20 tives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

21 Transportation of the Senate a report, produced in 

22 consultation with industry and academia, on the use 

23 and role of nuclear fission power in space. 

24 (2) CONTENTS.-The report required under 

25 paragraph (1) shall includeg:\VHLC\04131 B\04131 B.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 
550 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASAZO 18_002.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

g:IVHLC\041 31 8\041 31 8.017.xml 

Aplil13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

29 

(A) an assessment of the prospects for inspace nuclear fission reactors, describing particular roles and missions for which nuclear 

power is uniquely well-suited; 

(B) a description of the convergence between NASA's existing Plntoninm-2:38 RTG 

programs and ongoing nuclear thermal propulsion and nuclear power generation development 

programs; 

(C) a detailed plan for encouraging convergence between NASA's various nuclear power 

and propulsion efforts; 

(D) an identification of key infrastructure 

and facilities needed for the development of inspace nuclear fission power reactors; 

(E) an identification of particular legal 

issues, including regulatory challenges, that 

must be addressed for the use of nuelear fission 

power systems; 

(F) how small in-space nuclear fission reactors can complement or replace existing and 

planned radioisotope thermal generator capabilities; and 

(68871 1127) 
551 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

30 

(G) information on very low eost, high reli2 ability designs that can be made operational 

3 quickly. 

4 (d) DEMONSTRATION.-NASA should demonstrate a 

5 nuclear electric power reactor for use in space using exist6 ing authorized funding levels and within a schedule made 

7 possible by appropriated funding. 

8 TITLE IV-AERONAUTICS 

9 SEC. 401. SUPERSONIC RESEARCH. 

10 (a) POLICY.-It is the policy of the United States to 

11 reduce Government barriers to the development of civil su12 personic transportation. 

13 (b) RESEARCH.-Section 401l2(a) of title 51, United 

14 States Code, is amendedIS (1) by striking "The Administrator" and insert16 ing the following: 

17 "(1) IN GENERAL.-The Administrator"; and 

18 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

19 "(2) RESI'JARCII.-The Administrator, in cou20 sultation with the Administrator of the Federal 

21 Aviation Administration, shall undertake research on 

22 supersonic transport to inform and accelerate the 

23 promulgation of domestic regulations and inter24 national standards and recommended practices that 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
552 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

31 

will open up the U.S. civil airspace to civil super2 sonic transport.". 

3 SEC. 402. UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS RESEARCH. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.-

5 (1) TITLE 51.-Chapter 315 of title 51, United 

6 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 

7 following: 

8 "§ 31506. Unmanned aircraft systems research 

9 "The Administrator, in consultation with the Admin10 istrator of the Federal Aviation Administration and other 

11 Federal agencies, shall conduct research on facilitating the 

12 safe integration of unmanned aircraft systems into the na13 tiona! airspace system, including14 "(1) positioning and navigation systems; 

15 "(2) sense-and-avoid capabilities; 

16 "(:3) secure data and communication links; 

17 "(4) flight recovery systems; and 

18 "(5) human systems integration.". 

19 (2) CONFORMING AMENDl\IENT.-'fhe table of 

20 sections for chapter 315 of title 51, United States 

21 Code, is amended by adding at the end the following 

22 new item: 

"31506. Unmanned. aircraft s~"Stcms research.". 

23 (b) CooPERATTI""E UNl\LmNED AERIAL VEmCLE Ac24 TIVITIES.-Section 31504 of title 51, United States Code, 

25 is amended by adding at the end the following: "Operg:IVHLC\041318\04131 B.Q17.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
553 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

32 

1 ational flight data derived from such cooperative agree2 ments shall be made available, in appropriate and usable 

3 formats, to the Administration and the l<~ederal Aviation 

4 Administration for the development of regulatory stand5 ards.". 

6 SEC. 403. 21ST CENTURY AERONAUTICS RESEARCH CAPA7 BILITIES INITIATIVE. 

8 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.-The Administrator shall es9 tablish an initiative to be known as the 21st Century Aero10 nautics Research Capabilities Initiative, funded through 

11 the ConstT'Uction of Facilities account, to ensure that 

12 NASA possesses the infrastructure capabilities and com13 putational tools necessary to conduct flight demonstration 

14 projeets across the range of NASA aeronautics interests. 

15 (b) ACTIVITUJS.-In carrying out the 21st Century 

16 Aeronautics l{esearch Capabilities Initiative, the Adminis17 trator shall18 (1) upgrade and create facilities for civil and 

19 national security aeronautics research; and 

20 (2) support flight testing activities. 

21 (e) 0PERA'l'ING MODEL.-ln carrying out the 21st 

22 Century Aeronautics Hesearch Capabilities Initiative, the 

23 Administrator shall, to the greatest e:x-tent practicable, 

24 build on NASA's work on developing its Operating Model 

g:\VHLC\04131 8\04131 8.o17 .xml 

Apri113. 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
554 

G:\CMTE\S015\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

and the results of the Technical Capabilities Assessment 

2 Team. 

3 (d) REPORT.-

4 (1) RJ<::PORT REQUIRED.-Not later than 120 

5 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Ad6 ministrator shall submit to the Committee on 

7 Science, Space, and Technology of the House of 

8 Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, 

9 Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report 

10 containing a 5-year plan for the implementation of 

11 the 21st Century Aeronautics Research Capabilities 

12 Initiative. 

13 (2) EIJEMENTS.-The report required under 

14 this subsection shall include15 (A) a description of proposed projects; 

16 (B) a description of how the projects align 

17 with the Aeronautics Strategic Implementation 

18 Plan; and 

19 (C) a timetable for carrying out activities 

20 and initiatives authorized under this section. 

21 (e) AUTHORIZA'fiON OF APPROPRIATIONS.-There 

22 arc authorized to be appropriated $50,000,000, funded 

23 through the Construction of Facilities account, for fiscal 

24 year 2019 to carry ont this section. 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.D17.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
555 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

34 

SEC. 404. EXPERIMENTAL PLANE PROGRAM. 

2 (a) PorjiCY.-It is the policy of the United States to 

3 maintain the role of the United States as a world leader 

4 in aeronautical science and technology. 

5 (b) OB.JECTIVE.-A fundamental objective of NASA 

6 aeronautics research is the steady progression and expan7 sion of high-speed flight research and capabilities, inelud8 ing the science and technology of critical underlying dis9 eiplines and competencies, the most important of which 

10 are computational-based analytical and predictive tools 

11 and methodologies, aero thermodynamics, high-speed 

12 flight propulsion, high-temperature structures and mate13 rials, and flight controls. 

14 SEC. 405. HYPERSONIC TECHNOLOGY PROJECT. 

15 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds that16 ( 1) the development of new hypersonic flight 

17 technologies is important to the United States; 

18 (2) though hypersonic flight technologies are 

19 likely to be applied to enhance defense systems in 

20 the near-term, in the long-term, application of such 

21 technologies may expand to include improved access22 to-space capabilities that benefit NASA; and 

23 (3) NASA maintains specialized facilities and 

24 experts who will focus on research areas that explore 

25 challenges in hypersonic flight. 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.Q17.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
556 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

85 

(b) POLICY.-ln carrying out the Hypersonic Tech2 nology project, NASA should focus research and develop3 ment efforts on high-speed propulsion systems, reusable 

4 vehicle technologies, high-temperature materials, and sys5 tems analysis. 

6 (c) AUTHORIZED FUNT>ING.-Subject to the avail7 ability of appropriations, the Administrator shall make 

8 available at least $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2019 for the 

9 Hypersonic Technology project. 

10 TITLE V-COMMERCIAL 

11 SEC. 501. COMMERCIAL SUPPLY OF SPACE PRODUCTS. 

12 (a) IN GENERAL.-Subehapter II of chapter 501 of 

13 title 51, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 

14 end the following: 

15 "§ 50117. Commercial supply of space products 

16 "(a) IN GENERAL.-ln planning and carrying out 

17 space exploration missions, the Administrator shall, to the 

18 greatest extent practicable, prioritize the acquisition and 

19 use of space products provided by a United States com20 mercial provider or through a public-private partnership 

21 with a United States commercial provider. 

22 "(b) SPACE PRODFCT DEFINED.-In this section, the 

23 term 'space product' means a tangible good, including a 

24 finished good, or commodity, inelnding a propellant, water, 

25 oxygen, or gas, thatg:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
557 

G:\CMTE\Sal5\SPACE\NASA20!8_002.XML 

36 

"(1) is required for space exploration activities; 

2 and 

3 "(2) originates in outer space. 

4 "(c) COMMODITIES USED IN SPACE.-

5 "(1) LIST OF COMMODITIES.-ln planning a 

6 space e:Jo..-ploration mission, the Administrator shall 

7 create a list of commodities to be used during such 

8 mission. The list shall include specification of each 

9 commodity, anticipated quantity, and the location 

10 and the timeframe of need. 

11 "(2) COMMODITY COST BASIS.-For each com12 modity listed pursuant paragraph (1), NASA shall 

13 establish a commodity cost basis that shall represent 

14 the lesser of15 "(A) the estimated cost to procure the 

16 commodity on Earth and deliver the commodity 

17 to the location of usc; and 

18 "(B) the estimated cost for the Govern19 ment to procure the equivalent commodity that 

20 is a space product. 

21 "(3) PUBLICATION.-The Administrator shall 

22 annually publish the information compiled under 

23 paragraphs (1) and (2) during the previous calendar 

24 year. 

g:\VHLC\04 1 318\041318.Q17 .xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
558 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

37 

1 "(d) EXCEPTIONS.-The Administrator shall not be 

2 required to prioritize the acquisition of space products for 

3 the purposes described in subsection (a) if, on a case-by4 case basis5 "(1) the Administrator determines that6 "(A) cost-effective space products that 

7 meet specific mission requirements would not be 

8 reasonably available from United States com9 mercial providers when required; 

10 "(B) the use of space products from 

11 United States commercial providers poses an 

12 unacceptable mission risk; or 

13 " (C) the use of space products IS incon14 sistent with international agreements for inter15 national collaborative efforts relating to science 

16 and technology; or 

17 "(2) the Secretary of the Air Force determines 

18 that the use of space commodities from United 

19 States commercial providers is inconsistent with na20 tional security objectives. 

21 "(e) AGREEMENTS WITH FOREIGN ENTITII<JS.-

22 Nothing in this section shall prevent the Administrator 

23 from planning or negotiating agreements with foreign gov24 ernmental entities for the provision of space products.". 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April 13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(68871 1 127) 
559 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SP ACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

38 

1 (b) CONFORl\IH\G A.iVIENDMENT.-Subchapter II of 

2 chapter 501 of title 51, United States Code, is amended 

3 by adding at the end the follovving: 

"50117. Commercial supply of space products.". 

4 SEC. 502. COMMERCIAL PROVISION OF SERVICES. 

5 (a) IN GEN"ERAL.-Subchapter II of ehapter 501 of 

6 title 51, United States Code, is further amended by adding 

7 at the end the following: 

8 "§ 50118. Commercial provision of services 

9 "(a) IN GENERAL.-In planning and earrying out 

10 space exploration missions, the Administrator shall, to the 

11 greatest extent praetieahle, aeqnire serviees to be carried 

12 out in outer space by a United States eommercial provider 

13 or through a public-private partnership with a United 

14 States commercial provider to support such missions. 

15 "(b) EXCEPTIONS.-The Administrator shall not be 

16 required to aequire services under subsection (a) from a 

17 United States commercial provider or through a public18 private partnership with a United States eommereial pro19 vider if, on a case-by-ease basis20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:IVHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13. 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

"(1) the Administrator determines that-

" (A) cost-effeetive services that meet speeifie mission requirements would not be reasonably available from United States commercial 

providers when required; 

(688711127) 
560 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

39 

1 "(B) the use of such serviees from United 

2 States commercial pro-viders poses an unaccept3 able mission risk; or 

4 "(C) the use of such services 1s mcon5 sistent with international agreements for intcr6 national collaborative efforts relating to science 

7 and technology; or 

8 "(2) the Secretary of the .. A.ir Force determines 

9 that the use of services from United States commer10 cial providers is inconsistent with national security 

11 objectives. 

12 "(c) AGREEMENTS WITH FOREIGN ENTITIES.-

13 Nothing in this section shall prevent the Administrator 

14 from planning or negotiating agreements with foreign gov15 ernmental entities for the provision of support services to 

16 be carried out in outer space.". 

17 (b) CONFORMING A.'VIENDMENT.-Subchapter II of 

18 chapter 501 of title 51, United States Code, is further 

19 amended by adding at the end the following: 

"50118. Comrncreial provision of senrices.". 

20 SEC. 503. COMMERCIAL IN-SPACE INFRASTRUCTURE. 

21 (a) IN GENERAL.-Subchapter II of chapter 501 of 

22 title 51, United States Code, is further amended by adding 

23 at the end the following: 

g:\VHLC\04131 8\04131 8.017.xml 

April 13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
561 

G:\CMTE\SC\J5\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

40 

"§ 50119. Commercial in-space infrastructure 

2 "(a) IN GENERAL.-In planning and carrying out 

3 space exploration missions, the Administrator shall, to the 

4 greatest e2-'tent practicable, make use of commercial m5 space infrastructure to support such missions. 

6 "(b) COMMERCIAL IN-SPACE I~'FRA.STRUCTrRE.-In 

7 this section, the term 'commercial in-space infrastructure' 

8 means infrastructure that is9 "(1) owned, managed, or built by a United 

10 States commercial provider or through a public-pri11 vate partnership with a United States commercial 

12 provider; and 

13 "(2) located more than 320,000 kilometers 

14 from the Earth's surface. 

15 "(c) EXCEPTIONS.-The Administrator shall not be 

16 required to use commercial in-space infrastructure if, on 

17 a case-by-case basis18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

Apri113, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

"(1) the Administrator determines that-

" (A) cost-effective infrastructure that 

meets specific mission requirements would not 

be reasonably available from United States 

commercial providers when required; 

"(B) the use of commercial in-space infrastructure poses an unacceptable mission risk; or 

"(C) the use of commercial in-space infrastructure is inconsistent with international 

(688711127) 
562 

G:\CMTE\SC\l5\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

41 

1 agreements for international collaborative ef2 forts relating to science and technology; or 

3 "(2) the Secretary of the Air li'orce determines 

4 that the use of commercial in-space infrastructure is 

5 inconsistent with national security objectives. 

6 "(d) AGREEYIENTS WITH FOREIGN ENTITIES.-

7 Nothing in this section shall prevent the Administrator 

8 from planning or negotiating agreements with foreign gov9 ernmental entities for the use infrastructure in support 

10 of United States civil government activities in outer 

11 space.". 

12 (b) CONFORMING Al\IENDMENT.-Subchapter II of 

13 chapter 501 of title 51, United States Code, is further 

14 amended by adding at the end the following: 

''50119. Commercial in-space infrastructure.''. 

15 SEC. 504. PREFERENCE FOR LAUNCH VEHICLES MANUFAC16 TURED IN THE UNITED STATES. 

17 It is the sense of Congress that the Administrator 

18 should, to the greatest extent possible, with respect to en19 tering into contracts for commercial space data and serv20 ices, provide weig·hed preference, selection points, and 

21 other incentives for the use of launch vehicles that are 

22 manufactured in the United States. 

23 SEC. 505. STUDIES ON INDUSTRIAL BASE. 

24 No funds may be obligated or expended by the Ad25 ministrator for purposes of carrying out a Bureau of Ing:\VHLC\041318\041318.Q17.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
563 

G:\CMfE\SC\15\SPACE\NASAZO 18_002.XML 

42 

dustry and Security survey of the United States aerospace 

2 industrial base until the date that is 30 days after the 

3 date on which the Administrator submits to the Com4 mittee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House 

5 of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, 

6 Science, aml Transportation of the Seuate a written notif'i7 cation that includes8 (1) the proposed subject matter of such survey; 

9 (2) a description of the information to be re10 quired of survey respondents; aml 

11 (8) any penalties proposed to be assessed by the 

12 Federal Government against respondents for non13 compliance with survey requirements. 

14 SEC. 506. SPECTRUM COORDINATION. 

15 (a) IN GENER.AL.-The Administrator shall develop 

16 and implement a plan to more effectively and efficiently, 

17 taking into account NASA's spectrum requirements, share 

18 electromagnetic spectrum assigned to NASA with United 

19 States nongovernmental entities operating or proposing to 

20 operate space objects. 

21 (b) REPORT.-Not later than 180 days after the date 

22 of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit 

23 to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of 

24 the House of Representatives and the Committee on Comg:\VHLC\041318\041318.D17.xml 

April 13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(68871 1 127) 
564 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

merce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report 

2 on the plan developed under subsection (a). 

3 SEC. 507. ENHANCED-USE LEASING. 

4 (a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-lt is the sense of Con5 gress that6 (1) NASA possesses a variety of unique and 

7 world-class facilities; 

8 (2) NASA is developing and using many dif9 ferent methods to offset the cost of maintaining and 

10 operating such facilities; 

11 (3) nongovernmental entities may be able to use 

12 such facilities in a manner that is cost-effective; and 

13 (4) agreements between NASA and nongovern14 mental entities regarding the usc of such facilities 

15 may offset a portion of the spending of NASA. 

16 (b) EX'l'ENSION OF AeTHORITY To LEASE NoN-Ex17 CESS PROPERTY.-Section 20145(g) of title 51, United 

18 States Code, is amended by striking "December ~n, 2018" 

19 and inserting "December 31, 2020". 

20 (c) CONDITION ON USE OF FVNDS.-For any year 

21 for which funds are made available under section 20145 

22 of title 51, United States Code, (as amended by subsection 

23 (b)), no funds may be expended by the Administrator 

24 under such section after January 31 unless Administrator 

25 submits, before such date, to the Committee on Science, 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 
565 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA20!8_002.XML 

44 

Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives 

2 and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transpor3 tation of the Senate the annual report required under such 

4 section for the prior year. 

5 SEC. 508. SATELLITE SERVICING TECHNOLOGIES. 

6 The Administrator shall continue to restructure 

7 NASA investments in the development of satellite serv8 icing technologies to reduce the overall cost to NASA and 

9 align with NASA needs for exploration. 

10 TITLE VI-POLICY 

11 SEC. 601. NASA-FUNDED INSTITUTES. 

12 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds that on June 9, 

13 2016, the Office of Inspector General of NASA reported 

14 that15 (1) NASA does not aggregate information on 

16 the universe, status, or funding levels for the many 

17 institutes it supports; 

18 (2) the absence of this information makes it dif19 ficult for NASA leaders to strategically evaluate the 

20 scope or purpose of its institute investments and for 

21 Congress and other stakeholders to understand how 

22 NASA is spending more than three-quarters of a bil23 lion dollars of its budget annually; 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
566 

G:\CMTE\S015\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

45 

(3) absent comprehensive, centralized informa2 tion about these investments, it may be difficult for 

3 NASA to avoid duplication among its efforts; 

4 ( 4) NASA has not defined what constitutes an 

5 institute or established guidance and metrics on the 

6 management, use, or expectations for return on in7 vestment; 

8 (5) such guidance may enable NASA to gain a 

9 better understanding of how funds directed to 

10 NASA-funded institutes are utilized to accomplish 

11 the mission and goals of NASA, increase its return 

12 on investment, and evaluate the performance of such 

13 institutes; and 

14 (6) NASA lacks a standard process to assess a 

15 potential grantee's financial condition prior to grant 

16 award or to impose additional reporting or oversight 

17 requirements that such a condition may warrant, 

18 and without such a mechanism, NASA risks making 

I 9 uninformed investment decisions. 

20 (b) INSTITUTE BUDGETS.-Section 80103(a) of title 

21 51, United States Code, is amended22 (1) in paragraph (5), by striking "and" at the 

23 end; 

24 (2) by redesignating paragTaph (6) as para25 graph (7); and 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 
567 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

46 

(3) by inserting after paragraph (5) the fol2 lowing: 

3 "(6) the budg'et for each NASA-funded insti4 tute; and". 

5 (c) REPORT.-Not later than 90 days after the date 

6 of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit 

7 to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of 

8 the House of Representatives and the Committee on Com9 merce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report 

10 that recommends guidance and metrics for the manage11 ment, utilization, eA.'J)ectations for return on investment, 

12 and financial condition of NASA-funded institutes. 

13 SEC. 602. BASELINE AND COST CONTROLS. 

14 Seetion 30104(e)(l)(A) of title 51, United States 

15 Code, is amended16 (1) in clause (ii) by striking "and" at the end; 

17 (2) in clause (iii) by striking "and" at the end; 

18 and 

19 (3) by adding· at the end the following: 

20 "(iv) any changes made in the per21 formance or schedule milestones and the 

22 de!,'Tee to which such changes have contrib23 uted to the increase in total cost; 

24 "(v) new estimates of the specific 

25 project or specific program cost; and 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April 13. 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
568 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

2 

3 

47 

"(vi) a statement validating that the 

management structure of the project or 

program is adequate to control cost; and". 

4 SEC. 603. REPORTS TO CONGRESS. 

5 (a) IN GENEHAL.-Chapter 301 of title 51, United 

6 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol7 lowing: 

8 "§ 30105. Concurrent reports 

9 "1<-,or any report that the Administration submits to 

10 the Committee on Appropriations of the House of l{ep11 resentatives or the Committee on Appropriations of the 

12 Senate, the Administrator shall concurrently submit such 

13 report to the Committee on Science, Space, and Tech14 nology of the House of Representatives and the Com15 mcree, Science, and Transportation Committee of the Sen16 ate.". 

17 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.-The table of sec18 tions for chapter 301 of title 5], United States Code, 1s 

19 amended by adding at the end the following: 

"30105. Concnrrm1t repm·ts.n. 

20 SEC. 604. INTERNATIONAL TECHNICAL AND OPERATIONAL 

21 STANDARDS. 

22 (a) FINDINGS.-CongTess finds that23 (1) section 71301 of title 51, United States 

24 Code, directs the Administrator to "enter into dis25 cussions with the appropriate representatives of 

g:\VHLC\04131 8\04131 8.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 
569 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

48 

spacefariug nations who have or plan to have crew 

2 transportation systems capable of orbital flight or 

3 flight beyond low Earth orbit for the purpose of 

4 agreeing on a common docking system standard"; 

5 (2) the development of an international docking 

6 standard has been beneficial in promoting Govern7 ment and private sector space exploration, interoper8 ability, and United States international leadership; 

9 (3) NASA continues the development described 

10 in paragraph (2) by coordinating' the development of 

11 joint international deep space interoperability stand12 ards; and 

13 (4) the long-term goals of NASA, as described 

14 m section 202(a) of the National Aeronautics and 

15 Space Administration Authorization Act of 2010 ( 42 

16 U.S.Q. 18312(a)), include e21.-panding permanent 

17 human presence beyond low-Earth orbit. 

18 (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-It is the sense of Con19 gress that20 ( 1) the plans of NASA for crewed exploration 

21 beyond low-Earth orbit should involve a wide array 

22 of partners to address the technological challenges of 

23 deep space exploration; 

24 (2) the development of common terminology 

25 and concepts for spacecraft design and safety will 

g:\VHLC\0413181041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
570 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

49 

help promote NASA leadership in space and space2 craft design; 

3 (3) the adoption of common design and safety 

4 terminology and concepts across NASA would enable 

5 NASA to pursue the long-term goals of ::\fASA, de6 scribed in section 202(a) of the National Aero7 nautics and Space Administration Authorization Act 

8 of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 18312(a)), in a manner that is 

9 effective and efficient; and 

10 ( 4) NASA should continue to develop and pro11 mote common terminology and concepts for space12 craft design and safety. 

13 SEC. 605. NASA CONTRACTOR RESPONSffiiLITY WATCH 

14 LIST. 

15 (a) IN GENERA.L.-The Administrator shall establish 

16 and maintain a watch list of contractors with a history 

17 of poor performance on space procurement contracts or 

18 research, development, test, and evaluation space program 

19 contracts. 

20 (b) BASIS FOR !NCI~USION ON LIST.-

21 (1) DETERl\UNATION.-The Administrator may 

22 place a contractor, including parties contracting 

23 under other transaction authorities, on the watch list 

24 established under subsection (a) upon determining 

25 that the ability of the contractor to perform a cong:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

Aprtl13, 2018 (9:31a.m.) 

(688711127) 
571 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA20 18_002.XML 

50 

1 tract speeified in sueh subsection Is uncertain be2 cause of any of the following: 

3 (A) Poor performance or award fee scores 

4 below 50 percent. 

5 (B) F'inancial concerns. 

6 (C) Felony convictions or civil judgements. 

7 (D) Security or foreign ownership and con8 trol issues. 

9 (2) DISCRETION OF THE ADMINISTR.o\.TOR.-

1 0 The Administrator shall be responsible for deter11 mining which contractors to place on the 'vatch list, 

12 whether au entire company or a specific division 

13 should be included, and when to remove a contractor 

14 from the list. 

15 (c) EFFECT OF LISTING.-

16 (1) PRIME CONTRl1.C'rs.-NASA may not solicit 

17 an offer from, award a contract to, execute an engi18 neering change proposal vlith, or exercise an option 

19 on any program of NASA with a contractor included 

20 on the list established under subsection (a) ·without 

21 the prior direct approval of the Administrator. 

22 (2) SuBCONTRACTS.-A prime contractor on a 

23 contract entered into ¥.-ith NASA may not enter into 

24 a subcontract valued in excess of $3,000,000 or five 

25 percent of the prime contract value, whichever is 

g:\VHLC\0413181041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
572 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

51 

lesser, with a contractor included on the watch list 

2 established under subsection (a) without the prior 

3 approval of the Administrator. 

4 (d) REQUEST !''OR REMOVAL FROM LIST.-A con5 tractor may submit to the Administrator a \\Titten request 

6 for removal from the watch list, ineluding evidence that 

7 the contractor has resolved the issue that was the basis 

8 for inclusion on the list. 

9 (e) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.-Nothing in this see1 0 tion shall be construed as preventing the suspension or 

11 debarment of a contractor, but inclusion on the wateh list 

12 shall not be construed as a punitive measure or de facto 

13 suspension or debarment of a contractor. 

14 SEC. 606. HUMAN SPACE EXPLORATION RISK. 

15 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds the following·: 

16 (1) American leadership in the peaceful explo17 ration and use of outer space has been a long-stand18 ing priority for the United States. 

19 (2) The reestablishment of the National Space 

20 Council by President Trump demonstrates the stra21 tegic importance of outer space to the Nation. 

22 (3) The December 2017 National Security 

23 Strategy of the United States establishes the broad 

24 strategic importance of outer space exploration and 

25 use for the United States. 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
573 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

52 

(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-It is the sense of Con2 gress that3 (1) exploration and usc of outer space is a mat4 tcr of broad, national strategic importance; and 

5 (2) space exploration decision-making and re6 quirement-setting in such a strategic context is com7 plex, especially with respect to setting appropriate 

8 priorities and levels of risk tolerance. 

9 (c) REPORT ON INHERENT JUS'riFIABLFJ RISK.-

10 (1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 1 year after 

11 the date of enactment of this Act, the National 

12 Space Council, or its designee, shall submit to Con13 gress and make available to the publie a report re14 lating the broad strategic national importance of 

15 space to the inherent, justifiable risk of the explo16 ration and use of space. 

17 (2) POLICY A.~D S'rRATEGY.-The Adminis18 trator shall engage with appropriate members of the 

19 private sector, academia, and nonprofit organiza20 tions on a policy and strategy of enterprise-level en21 gineering and operational risk management to 

22 present in the report that addresses inherent, justifi23 able risks of loss of life that may occur in space ex24 ploration and use. 

g:\VHLC\041318\041318.017.xml 

Aprtl13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
574 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\SPACE\NASA2018_002.XML 

53 

1 (3) CONTENTS.-The report required under 

2 paragraph (1) shall3 (A) clarity the broad strategic case and 

4 value of space; 

5 (B) address inherent, justifiable risks of 

6 loss of life that may oceur in space exploration 

7 and use; and 

8 (C) discuss enterprise- and architecture9 level approaches for exploration risk manage10 ment. 

g:\VHLC\0413181041318.D17.xml 

April13, 2018 (9:31 a.m.) 

(688711127) 
575 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA_MGR_OOl.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5503 

OFFERED BY M . ____ _ 

Page 3, strike lines 13 through 16 (and redesignate 

accordingly). 

Page 5, line 14, insert ", including $350,000,000 for 

a second mobile launch platform and associated Space 

Launch System activities" after "Systems". 

Page 5, line 19, strike "Experimental" and insert 

"Established". 

Page 6, line 11, strike "$2,150,000,000" and insert 

"$1,350,000,000". 

Page 6, line 14, strike "$1,350,000,000" and insert 

"$2,150,000,000". 

Page 8, line 15, strike "Space Grant" and insert 

"National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program". 

Page 9, line 21, strike "an". 

Page, 9, line 23, strike "could" and insert "can". 

Page 10, line 15, strike "valuable". 

g:\VHLC\041618\041618.023.xml 

April16, 2018 (9:44a.m.) 

(69075416) 
576 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA_MGR_OO l.XML 

2 

Page 10, after line 19, insert the following (and redesignate accordingly): 

1 (3) In addition to the priorities under para2 graph (2), the United States has a larger and broad3 er need and use for further microgravity research. 

Page 12, line 3, insert "the" after "support". 

Page 12, line 5, insert "on" before "surfaces". 

Page 12, line 10, strike "International Space Station" and insert "ISS". 

Page 13, line 7, strike "3 mouths" and insert "90 

days". 

Page 13, line 12, insert "the Administrator" before 

"shall make available". 

Page 13, line 14, strike "LEO" and insert "Low 

Earth Orbit". 

Page 13, after line 18, iusert the following (and redesignate accordingly): 

4 (1) in line with the National Space Council PolS icy Directive 1, as implemented by the President's 

6 memo of December 11, 2017, the United States 

7 should lead the return of humans to the :Moon for 

g:\VHLC\041618\041618.023.xml 

Aoril16. 201819:44 a.m.) 

(69075416) 
577 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA_MGR_OOI.XML 

3 

1 long·-term exploration aud utilization, followed by 

2 human missions to Mars and other destinations; 

Page 13, beginning on line 23, strike "(hereinafter 

referred to as 'JSC')". 

Page 14, line 7, strike "JSC" and insert "Johnson 

Space Center". 

Page 14, line 12, strike "JSC" and insert "Johnson 

Space Center". 

Page 15, line 4, strike "JSC" and insert "Johnson 

Space Center". 

Page 15, line 11, strike "JSC" aud insert "Johnson 

Space Center". 

Page 16, strike lines 8 through 22 and insert the 

following: 

3 (c) GAO REPORT ON METRICS FOR LOGISTICAL At'<D 

4 TRANSPOR'r REDUNDANCY.-

5 (1) IN GENEIM.L.-Not later than 180 days 

6 after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comp7 troller General of the United States shall submit to 

8 the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of 

9 the Honse of Representatives and the Committee on 

10 Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Sen11 ate a report that contains an evaluation of approg:\VHLC\041618\041618.023.xml 

April16, 2018 (9:44 a.m.) 

(69075416) 
578 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA_MGR_OOI.XML 

4 

priate teehnical benchmarks and metrics on the suit2 ability and performance, including cost, reliability, 

3 and availability of4 (A) all available crew and cargo vehicles 

5 for destinations in low-Earth orbit, cis-lunar 

6 space, and beyond; and 

7 (B) all available launch vehicles that are 

8 capable of deploying more than 20 tons to low9 Earth orbit and beyond, to support exploration 

I 0 and scientific missions, particularly to outer 

11 planets. 

12 (2) INCLUSION IN NASA Al~ALYSIS.-The Ad13 ministrator shall consider the Comptroller General's 

14 repmt findings on benchmarks and metrics as part 

15 of NASA's analysis of logistical and transport re16 dundancy. 

Page 18, after line 2, insert the following (and conform the table of contents accordingly): 

17 SEC. 206. MOBILE LAUNCH PLATFORM AND INTERIM CRYO18 GENIC PROPULSION STAGE. 

19 Consistent with NASA's appropriation for fiscal year 

20 2018, the Administrator shall pursue the following: 

21 (1) The expeditious development of a new-build, 

22 second Mobile Launch Platform specifically designed 

g:\VHLC\041618\041618.023.xml 

April16, 2018 (9:44a.m.) 

(69075416) 
579 

G:\CMTE\Sal5\SPACE\NASA_MGR_OOl.XML 

5 

1 to support the launch of Space Launch System con2 figurations that use the Exploration Upper Stage. 

3 (2) The procurement of a second Interim Cryo4 genic Propulsion Stage. 

Page 20, line 18, strike "to the greatest extent practicable, foster" and insert "foster, to the greatest extent 

practicable". 

Page 23, line 1, insert "of" before "GISS". 

Page 30, line 5, strike "electric". 

Page 34, line 5, strike "A fundamental objective" 

and insert "One of the fundamental objectives". 

Page 35, line 2, strike "project" and insert 

"Project". 

Page 35, line 9, strike "project" and insmt "Project 

from the Aeronautics account". 

Page 35, beginning ou line 20, strike "or through a 

public private partnership with a United States commercial provider". 

Page 36, line 10, strike "the". 

Strike sections 502, 503, and 506 of the bill (and 

redesignate and update the table of contents accordingly). 

Page 38, after line 3, insert the following: 

g:\VHLC\041618\041618.023.xml 

Apri116, 2018 (9:44a.m.) 

(69075416) 
580 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\SPACE\NASA_MGR_OO!.XML 

6 

1 SEC. 502. SPACE SERVICES AND IN-SPACE INFRASTRUC2 TURE. 

3 (a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-lt is the sense of Con4 gress that there exist many commercial opportunities with 

5 a wide array of providers and partners that ·will allow for 

6 more effective use of taxpayer investments in the pursuit 

7 of the long-term goals of NASA, as described in section 

8 202(a) of the National Aeronautics and Space Administra9 tion Authorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 18312(a)), in10 eluding expanding permanent human presence beyond low11 Earth orbit. 

12 (b) REPORT.-Not later than 120 days after the date 

13 of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit 

14 to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of 

15 the House of Representatives and the Committee on Com16 merce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report 

17 describing the various commercial opportunities and op18 tions for the procurement of in-space services or use of 

19 in-space infrastructure for exploration and other NASA 

20 missions. 

Page 43, line 11, insert ", States, and local governments" after "entities". 

Page 43, line 14, insert ", States, and local governments" after "entities". 

g:\VHLC\041618\041618.023.xml 

April 16, 2018 (9:44 a.m.) 

(69075416) 
581 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA_MGR_OOl.XML 

7 

Page 43, line 24, insert "the" before "Administrator". 

Page 44, line 5, strike "Technologies". 

Page 4 7, beginning on line 14, strike "the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee of the 

Senate" and insert "the Committee on Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation of the Senate". 

Page 51, line 20, strike "by President Trump" and 

insert "in 2017 by the President". 

At the end of the bill, add the following (and update 

the table of contents accordingly): 

1 SEC. 607. NASA LAUNCH SUPPORT AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

2 MODERNIZATION PROGRAM. 

3 (a) LAUNCH SUPPORT AND INI?RASTRUC'fURE MOD4 ERNIZATION.-The Administrator shall continue the proS gram established under seetiou 305 of the National Aero6 nautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 

7 2010 (42 U.S.C. 18325) for launch support and infra8 structure modernization for launch sites and ranges at 

9 NASA facilities that support the International Space Sta10 tion mission. 

11 (b) LEVERAGE OF INFRASTRUCTURE INVEST12 MENTS.-Such program should, to the greatest extent 

13 practicable, leverage current and planned State governg:\VHLC\041618\041618.023.xml 

April16, 2018 (9:44 a.m.) 

(69075416) 
582 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\NASA_MGR_OO\.XML 

8 

ment infrastmcture investments at NASA facilities to sup2 port these and other missions and use funding available 

3 under this program to collaborate on relevant infrastruc4 ture projects. 

g:IVHLC\0416181041618.023.xml 

April16, 2018 (9:44a.m.) 

(69075416) 
583 

G:\M\1 S\PERI..MU\PERLMU_027 .xML 

A'M:ENDMENT TO H.R. 5503 

OFFERED BY MR. PERLMUTTER OF COLORADO 

At the end of title II of the bill, add the following: 

1 SEC. __ • MARS 2038. 

2 (a) FINDING.-Congress finds that human ex:plo3 ration of Mars is an important objective in NASA's human 

4 exploration agenda. 

5 (b) PRIORITI7..ATION.-The Administrator shall 

6 prioritize timelines for fulfillment of the engineering, 

7 science, and safety requirements to reduce mission risk 

8 and ensure mission completion when evaluating human ex9 ploration of Mars by 2033, if not sooner. 

g:\VHLC\041618\041616.436.xml 

Aor1118. 201819:22 c.m.l 

(69104115) 
584 

G:\M\15\POSEY\POSEY_049.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5503 

OFFERED BY MR. POSEY OF FLORIDA 

At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following: 

1 SEC. __ SECURITY MANAGEMENT OF FOREIGN NA2 TIONAL ACCESS. 

3 The Administrator shall notify the Committee on 

4 Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Rep5 resentatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

6 and Transportation of the Senate when the agency has 

7 implemented the information technology security rec8 ommendations from the National Academy of Public Ad9 ministration on foreign national access management. 

g:\VHLC\041618\041618.006.xml 

April16, 2018 (9:03a.m.) 

(69073412) 
585 

G:\M\15\DUNNFL\DUNNFL_04l.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5503 

OFFERED BY MR. DUNN OF FLORIDA 

At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following: 

SEC. FEDERAL-STATE PARTNERSHIPS. 

2 (a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-lt is the sense of Con3 gress that, as State and local governments have invested 

4 hundreds of millions of dollars in new infrastructure and 

5 operations at Administration space facilities to meet the 

6 needs of civil, national security, and commercial space ac7 tivities, the Administration should seek to leverage such 

8 investments and the resources and capabilities of State 

9 and local governments. 

10 (b) REPORT.-Not later than 120 days after the date 

11 of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit 

12 to Congress a report describing13 (1) existing partnerships with State and local 

14 governments at Administration facilities; 

15 (2) past and current investments and partner16 ships in facility infrastructure and operations with 

17 State and local government that benefitted Federal, 

18 State, and commercial users; 

g:\VHLC\0415181041518.023.xml 

April15, 2018 (11 :25 p.m.) 

(69075712) 
586 

G:\M\15\DUNNFL\DUNNFL_04l.XML 

2 

(3) the contracting mechanisms used and the 

2 average response time from a facility infrastructure 

3 partnership proposal to approval by the Administra4 tion; 

5 ( 4) current or prospective opportunities for 

6 Federal-State matching grant funding to support 

7 shared infrastructure; 

8 (5) the benefits and challenges associated with 

9 Federal-State infrastructure partnerships; and 

10 (6) how, it at all, the Administration should ex11 pand Pederal-State partnerships to better meet the 

12 needs of civil, national security, and commercial 

13 space activities. 

g:\VHLC\0415181041518.023.xml 

April15, 2018 (11:25 p.m.) 

(69075712) 
587 

G:\M\15\ROHRABIROHRAB_025.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5503 

OFFERED BY MR. ROHRABACHER OF CALIFORNIA 

Page 4, after line 16, insert the following (nnd redesigmtte tho remaining sections according·ly): 

1 SEC. 101. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS CONTIN2 GENT ON NASA ADMINISTRATOR CONFIRMA3 TION. 

4 No approp1·iatious shall be authorized to NASA nutil 

5 a NASA Administmtor nominee is confim1ed by the 

6 United Rtl:ltes Senate. On the date of such confirmation, 

7 sections 1 02 aml 1 08 shall take effect. 

g:IVHLC\041618\041618.22&.xml 

Aprtl16, 2018 (2:46p.m.) 

(6SOS0313) 
588 

0:\M\ 151ROHRABIROHRAB_026.xML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5503 

OFFERED BY MR. ROHRABACHER OF CALIFORNIA 

At the end of the bill, add the followi11g: 

1 SEC. 6~~~· REAFFmMATIONS ON ORBITAL DEBRIS. 

2 (a) REAFFII:UIATION OF FINDING~.-Congress 1·eaf3 firms the findings under section 839(a) of the National 

4 Aeronautics and Space Administration 'l'I'!IIlsitiou Authm·-

5 ization Act of 2017 (Public Law 115-10) that6 (1) orbital debris poses serious risks to the 

7 opcmtioual s1mee cupabilities of the United States; 

8 (2) aH iutel'llcttional commitment ctntl iutegmtcd 

9 stl'ategic piau m·e needed to mitigctte the g1'0wth of 

10 tll'hital debris wherevm· possible; ami 

11 (3) the delay in the Office of Hcieuce and 'l'ech12 nology Policy's submission of a report on the status 

13 of intemutiowtl com·diuatiou aml development of m·-

14 bital delwis mitigation strategies is iucousistent with 

15 such risks. 

16 (b) l~EAFFIHi\lATION OF t-:lEN~E 01~ CONOHEHI':!.-Cou17 grc~;s I'cuftirms the sense of Congi'css nuder section 840(a) 

18 of the National Am1llmutics and Space Admiuist1·ation 

19 Tnmsition Anthodzatiou Act of 2017 (Public Law 115-

20 10) thatg:IVHLC\041618\04161B.228.xml 

Apnl16, 2018 (2:46p.m.) 

(69090511) 
589 

G:\M\15\ROHRAB\ROHRAB_026.XML 

2 

1 (1) orbital debris in low-Earth orbit poses sig2 nificant risks to spacecraft; 

3 (2) such orbital debris may increase clue to col4 Jisions between exjsting debris objects; ami 

5 (3) unclersbmding options to alldt·ess and re6 move m·bital debris is impm1ant for ensuring safe 

7 and effective spacecraft operations in low-Em1h 

8 orbit. 

g:IVHLC\041618\041618.226.xml 

April16, 2018 (2:46p.m.) 

(69090511) 
590 

G:IM\15\ROHRAB\ROHRAB_027.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5503 

OFFERED BY MR. ROHRABACHER OF CALIFORNIA 

Page 37, afteJ" line 20, insm1 the following (and l"edesigml.te accordingly): 

1 "(e) PUBLIC DISCLOSURE~.-A determination made 

2 by the Administmtm· or the Secretary regat'ding H space 

3 pYoduct uudel" subsectiou (d) shall be publicly disclosed 30 

4 days pri01· to the acquisition of snch space woduct.". 

g:\VHLC\041618\04161B.224.xml (69090811) 
591 

G:\M\15\PERLMU\PERLMU_026.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5503 

OFFERED BY MR. PERLMUTTER OF COLORADO 

Page 6, line 6, strike "$20,736,140,000" and insert 

"$20, 744,140,000". 

Page 8, line 11, strike "$100,000,000" and insert 

"$108,000,000". 

Page 8, line 15, strike "$40,000,000" and insert 

"$48,000,000". 

g:\VHLC\041618\041618.Q10.xml 

April16. 2018 (9: 19 a.m.) 

(69076611) 
592 

G:\M\15\PERLMU\PERLMU_028.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5503 

OFFERED BY MR. PERLMUTTER OF COLORADO 

Page 6, line 6, strike "$20,736,140,000" and insert 

"$21,207,140,000". 

Page 8, line 3, strike "$6,152,600,000" and insert 

"$6,628,600,000". 

Page 8, line 4, strike "$1,450,000,000" and insert 

"$1 ,921 ,000,000". 

g:IVHLC\041618\041618.435.xml 

April16, 2018 (8:53 p.m.) 

(69104211) 
593 

G:\M\15\FOSTER\FOSTER_093.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5503 

OFFERED BY MR. FOSTER OF ILLINOIS 

Page 29, line 23, strike "and". 

Page 30, line 3, strike the period at the end and insert "; and". 

Page 30, after line 3, insert the follo"'ing·: 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

g:\VHLC\041618\041618.301.xml 

April16, 2018 (4:04p.m.) 

(H) a cost analysis, including long-term 

and security costs, of the use of highly enriched 

uranium versus low-enriched uranium in power 

generation in space applications, including surface power and in-space propulsion. 

(69095412) 
594 

Amendment to H.R.5503 offered by Mr. Knight 

The Administrator shall submit to the Committee a report on the 

development of the Low-Boom Flight Demonstration aircraft, including 

the following: 

1) NASA's planned coordination with other executive agencies to 

ensure developmental and operational testing infrastructure 

availability during flight demonstration; and 

2) NASA's acquisition strategy to ensure availability of chase 

aircraft for flight demonstration. 
(595) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUPS: H.R. 5905, DEPARTMENT 

OF ENERGY SCIENCE AND 

INNOVATION ACT OF 2018; 

H.R. 5907, NATIONAL INNOVATION 

MODERNIZATION BY LABORATORY 

EMPOWERMENT ACT; AND 

H.R. 5906, ARPA-E ACT OF 2018 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 23, 2018 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:36 a.m., in room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. 

Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recess at 

any time. 

Pursuant to Committee Rule II(e) and House Rule XI(2)(h)(4), 

the Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes. 

Today we meet to consider H.R. 5905, the Department of Energy 

Science and Innovation Act of 2018; H.R. 5907, the National Innovation Modernization by Laboratory Empowerment Act; and H.R. 

5906, the ARPA-E Act of 2018. I’ll recognize myself for an opening 

statement. 

Today we consider these three energy bills. Together, they 

prioritize basic science research, modernize and increase the productivity of the DOE national labs, and enable the development of 

new technologies for the next generation. 

The first bill is H.R. 5905, the Department of Energy Science and 

Innovation Act of 2018, sponsored by Energy Subcommittee Chairman Randy Weber and Representative Zoe Lofgren. This legislation 

authorizes the basic research programs within the DOE Office of 

Science for fiscal years 2018 and 2019. It includes research in basic 

energy sciences, advanced scientific computing, high-energy physics, biological and environmental research, fusion energy science, 

and nuclear physics. These basic research programs are the core 

mission of the Department and will lead to scientific discoveries 

that will maintain U.S. leadership in technology. The bill authorizes basic research programs in solar fuels, electricity storage, bio-
596 

energy research, exascale computing, and low-dose radiation. It 

also authorizes Office of Science funding for upgrades and construction of seven high-priority user facilities at DOE national labs. 

These infrastructure and program investments are crucial to ensuring America remains a leader in basic research and innovation. 

This legislation is the product of over 4 years of bipartisan work 

by the Science Committee to advance basic research and set clear 

science priorities for the Department of Energy. It builds on the 

achievements of the House-passed H.R. 589, the Department of Energy Research and Innovation Act, and incorporates four bipartisan 

Science Committee infrastructure bills that passed the House in 

February. 

One example of the central missions authorized in the DOE 

Science and Innovation Act is the Exascale Computing program. 

Developing an exascale system is critical to enabling scientific discovery, strengthening national security, and promoting U.S. industrial competitiveness. Exascale computing will have real-world benefits for American industry and entice the best researchers in the 

world to conduct groundbreaking science at the DOE labs. 

In order to strengthen U.S. energy independence, this legislation 

also provides support for fusion energy sciences. When commercial 

fusion becomes available, it will revolutionize the energy market 

and could significantly reduce global carbon emissions. 

This bill authorizes funds for U.S. contributions to the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, or ITER, project, a 

critical step to achieving commercial fusion energy. 

I again thank Representative Weber as well as Representative 

Lofgren for their longstanding support of basic research and investments in our world class science facilities at the DOE national labs. 

The next energy bill is H.R. 5907, the National Innovation Modernization by Laboratory Empowerment Act. This legislation directs 

the Secretary to provide signature authority to the directors of the 

national laboratories, allowing lab directors to make decisions on 

cooperative agreements with industry where the total cost is less 

than $1 million. This provides the labs with more flexibility and removes red tape that makes it difficult for businesses to partner 

with the labs. DOE national labs can provide the private sector 

with access to research infrastructure as they develop new technologies but a lengthy approval process can smother industry’s interest. This bill gives the labs freedom to pursue agreements that 

will increase U.S. competitiveness and maintain our technology 

leadership. 

I want to thank this bill’s sponsors, Representative Randy 

Hultgren and Representative Ed Perlmutter, for their efforts on 

this initiative. 

H.R. 5906, the ARPA-E Act of 2018, is our third and last energy 

bill today. H.R. 5906, sponsored by Science Committee Vice Chairman Frank Lucas and Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson, establishes DOE policy for the Advanced Research Projects AgencyEnergy program. This legislation expands the mission of ARPA-E, 

and allows the program to develop transformative science and technology solutions to address energy, environmental, economic, and 

national security challenges. Notably, this includes allowing ARPA- 
597 

E to develop technologies to address the management, clean-up, 

and disposal of nuclear waste. 

This bill also maximizes the Department’s resources. It requires 

ARPA-E to coordinate with other DOE programs and avoid duplication and ensures that ARPA-E grants go to innovative technologies 

that would not otherwise be funded by the private sector. 

Together, these three bills prioritize critical research and outline 

important reforms to DOE programs within Science Committee jurisdiction. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

Today we will consider three energy bills. Together, they prioritize basic science 

research, modernize and increase the productivity of the Department of Energy 

(DOE) national labs and enable the development of new technologies for the next 

generation. 

The first bill is H.R. 5905, the Department of Energy Science and Innovation Act 

of 2018, sponsored by Energy Subcommittee Chairman Randy Weber and Rep. Zoe 

Lofgren. This legislation authorizes the basic research programs within the DOE Office of Science for fiscal years 2018 and 2019. It includes research in basic energy 

sciences, advanced scientific computing, high energy physics, biological and environmental research, fusion energy science and nuclear physics. 

These basic research programs are the core mission of the department and will 

lead to scientific discoveries that will maintain U.S. leadership in technology. 

This bill authorizes basic research programs in solar fuels, electricity storage, bioenergy research, exascale computing and low dose radiation. It also authorizes Office of Science funding for upgrades and construction of seven high-priority user facilities at DOE national labs. These infrastructure and program investments are 

crucial to ensuring America remains a leader in basic research and innovation. 

This legislation is the product of over four years of bipartisan work by the Science 

Committee to advance basic research and set clear science priorities for the Department of Energy. 

It builds on the achievements of the House passed H.R. 589, the Department of 

Energy Research and Innovation Act, and incorporates four bipartisan Science Committee infrastructure bills that passed the House in February. 

One example of the central missions authorized in the DOE Science and Innovation Act is the Exascale Computing Program. Developing an exascale system is critical to enabling scientific discovery, strengthening national security and promoting 

U.S. industrial competitiveness. Exascale computing will have real world benefits 

for American industry and entice the best researchers in the world to conduct 

groundbreaking science at the DOE labs. 

In order to strengthen U.S. energy independence, this legislation also provides 

support for fusion energy sciences. When commercial fusion becomes available, it 

will revolutionize the energy market and could significantly reduce global carbon 

emissions. 

This bill authorizes funds for U.S. contributions to the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER) project, a critical step to achieving commercial 

fusion energy. 

I again thank Rep. Weber as well as Rep. Lofgren for their long-standing support 

of basic research and investments in our world class science facilities at the DOE 

national labs. 

The next energy bill is H.R. 5907, the National Innovation Modernization by Laboratory Empowerment (NIMBLE) Act. 

This legislation directs the secretary to provide signature authority to the directors of the national laboratories, allowing lab directors to make decisions on cooperative agreements with industry where the total cost is less than $1 million. 

This provides the labs with more flexibility and removes red tape that makes it 

difficult for businesses to partner with the labs. DOE national labs can provide the 

private sector with access to research infrastructure as they develop new technologies. But a lengthy approval process can smother industry’s interest. This bill 

gives the labs freedom to pursue agreements that will increase U.S. competitiveness 

and maintain our technology leadership. 

I want to thank this bill’s sponsors, Rep. Randy Hultgren and Rep. Ed 

Perlmutter, for their efforts on this initiative. 

H.R. 5906, the ARPA-E Act of 2018 is our third energy bill today. 
598 

H.R. 5906, sponsored by Science Committee Vice Chairman Frank Lucas and 

Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson, establishes DOE policy for the Advanced 

Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) program. 

This legislation expands the mission of ARPA-E, and allows the program to develop transformative science and technology solutions to address energy, environmental, economic and national security challenges. Notably, this includes allowing 

ARPA-E to develop technologies to address the management, clean-up, and disposal 

of nuclear waste. 

This bill also maximizes the department’s resources. It requires ARPA-E to coordinate with other DOE programs and avoid duplication and ensures that ARPA-E 

grants go to innovative technologies that would not otherwise be funded by the private sector. 

Together, these three bills prioritize critical research and outline important reforms to DOE programs within Science Committee jurisdiction. 

Chairman SMITH. That concludes my opening statement, and the 

Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson, is 

recognized for hers. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for holding 

today’s markup of three important bills that support science and 

innovation at Department of Energy. The bills that we are considering today reflect many bipartisan priorities, and I hope each of 

them will receive strong support from Committee Members on both 

sides of the aisle today. 

The first bill we are considering, the Department of Energy 

Science and Innovation Act of 2018, provides important statutory 

direction to one of the most critical agencies that this Committee 

oversees. The Department of Energy’s Office of Science funds a 

wide range of research and development that has far-reaching impacts across DOE, the Federal Government, academia, and industry. Much of this language is derived from previous bipartisan, bicameral agreements that were included in H.R. 589, the Housepassed Department of Energy Research and Innovation Act of 2017. 

As we await Senate action on that legislation, I support moving forward with additional language included in today’s bill that would 

authorize upgrades to important Office of Science user facilities, direct DOE to provide sufficient support to maintain our commitments to the ITER international fusion project, and provide statutory authority to fund low-dose radiation research as well as a 

promising computational materials initiative at our national labs. 

I am also happy to see robust funding levels included in this bipartisan bill, particularly for the Biological and Environmental Research program, which supports critical research to reduce uncertainties and better understand the impacts of climate change. 

If signed into law, I want to make it clear that I expect the Department of Energy to appropriately fund and steward all of these 

activities, including important work in environmental systems 

modeling. However, amidst all of the positive aspects of this bill, 

I must say that I am a little disappointed in the process that we 

used to get to this markup. With a more deliberative and collaborative process, we certainly could have produced more comprehensive, well-vetted language that better reflects input from national 

laboratories, academic institutions, and industry on important 

projects and programs funded by the Office of Science. Such a process would have made a good bill better. 

The next bill we are considering is the National Innovation Modernization by Laboratory Empowerment Act. This bill would provide 
599 

our national laboratories with the authority to directly enter into 

certain research agreements with the private sector as long as 

those activities align with the laboratories’ strategic plans approved by the Department of Energy. This bill also includes appropriate safeguards to prevent waste, fraud, or abuse. I am happy to 

see us moving forward once again with this important policy 

change. 

The ARPA-E Act of 2018 is a welcome development from my perspective. I understand some of my Majority colleagues have not always been the biggest supporters of ARPA-E, but after years of 

successes and several independent assessments praising the agency’s work, we are finally passing a bill out of this Committee reauthorizing this now-vital component of our energy innovation pipeline. This bill preserves the mission and form of ARPA-E, while enabling it to also consider funding projects or technologies that can 

address DOE’’ monumental and longstanding challenge of environmental cleanup at the legacy sites of the Manhattan Project. 

It also includes language from a bipartisan ARPA-E Reauthorization Act that I introduced last year, which would ensure that sensitive business information collected by the agency remains protected. This will enable even greater private sector engagement in 

its programs. 

ARPA-E projects have attracted more than $2.6 billion in private-sector follow-on funding. Seventy-one projects have formed 

new companies, and 109 have gone on to partner with other government agencies to further their research. 

I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman and Congressman Lucas, for 

embracing ARPA-E’s innovative model and joining me in supporting its reauthorization. 

I thank you, and I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you, Chairman Smith, for holding today’s markup of three important bills 

that support science and innovation at DOE. The bills that we are considering today 

reflect many bipartisan priorities and I hope each of them will receive strong support from Committee Members on both sides of the aisle today. The first bill we are 

considering, the Department of Energy Science and Innovation Act of 2018 provides 

important statutory direction to one of the most critical agencies that this Committee oversees. The Department of Energy’s Office of Science funds a wide-range 

of research and development that has far-reaching impacts across DOE, the federal 

government, academia, and industry. Much of this language is derived from previous bipartisan, bicameral agreements that were included in H.R. 589, the Housepassed Department of Energy Research and Innovation Act of 2017. 

As we await Senate action on that legislation, I support moving forward with additional language included in today’s bill that would authorize upgrades to important Office of Science user facilities, direct DOE to provide sufficient support to 

maintain our commitments to the ITER international fusion project, and provide 

statutory authority to fund low-dose radiation research as well as a promising computational materials initiative at our national labs. 

I am also happy to see robust funding levels included in this bipartisan bill, particularly for the Biological and Environmental Research program, which supports 

critical research to reduce uncertainties and better understand the impacts of climate change. If signed into law, I want to make it clear that I expect the Department of Energy to appropriately fund and steward all of these activities, including 

important work in environmental systems modeling. 

However, amidst all the positive aspects of this bill, I must say that I am a little 

disappointed in the process that we used to get to this markup. With a more deliberative and collaborative process, we certainly could have produced more comprehensive, well-vetted language that better reflects input from national labora-
600 

tories, academic institutions, and industry on important projects and programs 

funded by the Office of Science. Such a process would have made a good bill better. 

The next bill we are considering is the National Innovation Modernization by Laboratory Empowerment Act. This bill would provide our national laboratories with the 

authority to directly enter into certain research agreements with the private sector 

as long as those activities align with the laboratories’ strategic plans approved by 

the Department of Energy. This bill also includes appropriate safeguards to prevent 

waste, fraud, or abuse. I am happy to see us moving forward once again with this 

important policy change. 

The ARPA-E Act of 2018 is a welcome development from my perspective. I understand some of my Majority colleagues have not always been the biggest supporters 

of ARPA-E, but after years of successes and several independent assessments praising the agency’s work, we are finally passing a bill out of this Committee reauthorizing this now-vital component of our energy innovation pipeline. 

This bill preserves the mission and form of ARPA-E, while enabling it to also consider funding projects or technologies that can address DOE’s monumental and longstanding challenge of environmental cleanup at the legacy sites of the Manhattan 

Project. It also includes language from a bipartisan ARPA-E Reauthorization Act 

that I introduced last year which would ensure that sensitive business information 

collected by the agency remains protected. This will enable even greater private sector engagement in its programs. 

ARPA-E projects have attracted more than 2.6 billion dollars in private sector follow-on funding. 71 projects have formed new companies and 109 have gone on to 

partner with other government agencies to further their research. I want to thank 

the Chairman and Congressman Lucas for embracing ARPA-E’s innovative model 

and joining me in supporting its reauthorization. 

Thank you Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

H.R. 5905 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 5905, 

the Department of Energy Science and Innovation Act of 2018, and 

the clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 5905, a bill to authorize basic research programs in the Department of Energy Office of Science for fiscal 

years 2018 and 2019. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

I’ll recognize the bill’s sponsor, the gentleman from Texas, the 

Chairman of the Energy Committee, Mr. Weber. 

Mr. WEBER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to 

speak on behalf of my bill, H.R. 5905, the Department of Energy 

Science and Innovation Act of 2018. 

This legislation authorizes the Department of Energy’s Office of 

Science programs for fiscal years 2018 and 2019. It also authorizes 

upgrades and new construction of major user facilities at Department of Energy national labs and universities. 

Over the past 4 years, the Energy Subcommittee has held hearings, met with stakeholders, and worked extensively with our colleagues to draft the language included in today’s legislation. We 

spoke with lab directors, DOE officials, academia, and industry 

about the right priorities for the Office of Science. The result was 

a series of bills that the Science Committee has advanced this Congress, including H.R. 589, H.R. 4376, H.R. 4377, and H.R. 4675. 

The legislation we will consider today combines these bills to 

form a comprehensive, bipartisan authorization of the Department’s basic science research. This includes over $6 billion in fundamental research and discovery science, largely performed at DOE 

national laboratories and user facilities around the country. 
601 

Two weeks ago, I, along with several of my Science Committee 

colleagues, had the opportunity to visit a number of these facilities 

at Argonne National Laboratory and Fermi National Accelerator 

Laboratory. We got to see firsthand the incredible work that these 

men and women do not only for our country but for the world. And 

I have to agree with Secretary Perry when he testified before this 

Committee earlier this month that these labs are, and I quote, ‘‘incubators of innovation, and they are among America’s greatest 

treasures.’’ High-energy physics, advanced scientific computing, focusing on basic and fundamental research at our national labs, 

these all provide the best opportunity for innovation and economic 

growth. The DOE Science and Innovation Act authorizes funding 

for critical infrastructure projects at these national labs. 

In the Basic Energy Sciences program, it authorizes upgrades to 

world-leading x-ray light source facilities around the country, like 

the Advanced Photon Source at Argonne National Laboratory, and 

the LINAC Coherent Light Source at SLAC National Accelerator 

Laboratory. These facilities give American scientists the tools they 

need to study the structure and behavior of physical and biological 

materials, enabling innovation in many fields, including creating 

new materials for industry and developing new pharmaceuticals. 

This legislation also authorizes the construction of new DOE research facilities in nuclear physics and high-energy physics. This 

includes construction of the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams, or 

FRIB, at Michigan State University, which will enable critical nuclear physics research across a wide breadth of fields, ranging from 

astrophysics to medicine. It’ll also the construction of the LongBaseline Neutrino Facility at Fermilab, which is an internationally 

coordinated project designed to build the world’s highest intensity 

neutrino beam. The research at this facility will help shed light on 

the universe and its origins. 

This bill also specifically authorizes basic research in fields that 

are critical to U.S. dominance in science and technology. It authorizes research in exascale computing, in electricity storage, and fusion energy sciences. It establishes a DOE Exascale Computing 

program, a low-dose radiation research program, and programs for 

managing our Energy Frontier Research Centers and Bioenergy 

Research Centers and ensures that we fulfill our commitments to 

the ITER project for fiscal years 2018 as well as 2019. 

Significant investments in basic science research by foreign countries like China threaten America’s global standing as the leader 

in scientific knowledge. To maintain our competitive advantage as 

the world leader in science, we must continue to support this research and the research infrastructure that will lead to next-generation energy technologies. 

H.R. 5905 is a commonsense bill that will maintain American 

leadership in science. 

I want to thank Chairman Smith, Representative Lofgren, Vice 

Chairman Lucas, and many of my Science Committee colleagues 

for cosponsoring this important legislation. I’m grateful for the opportunity to work with the Members of this Committee to guide research that will help America compete around the world. 

I encourage my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back 

the balance of my time. 
602 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. WEBER

Thank you Mr. Chairman for the opportunity to speak on behalf of my bill, H.R. 

5905, the Department of Energy Science and Innovation Act of 2018. 

This legislation authorizes the Department of Energy’s Office of Science programs 

for fiscal years 2018 and 2019. It also authorizes upgrades and new construction of 

major user facilities at Department of Energy (DOE) national labs and universities. 

Over the past four years, the Energy Subcommittee has held hearings, met with 

stakeholders, and worked extensively with our colleagues to draft the language included in today’s legislation. We spoke with lab directors, DOE officials, academia 

and industry about the right priorities for the Office of Science. 

The result was a series of bills that the Science Committee has advanced this 

Congress, including H.R. 589, H.R. 4376, H.R. 4377 and H.R. 4675. 

The legislation we will consider today combines these bills to form a comprehensive, bipartisan authorization of the department’s basic science research. This includes over $6 billion in fundamental research and discovery science, largely performed at DOE national laboratories and user facilities around the country. 

Two weeks ago, I, along with several of my Science Committee colleagues, had the 

opportunity to visit a number of these facilities at Argonne National Laboratory and 

Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. We got to see first-hand the incredible work 

that these men and women do for our country and for the world. I have to agree 

with Secretary Perry when he testified before this committee earlier this month that 

these labs are ‘‘incubators of innovation, and they are among America’s greatest 

treasures.’’ 

From high energy physics to advanced scientific computing, focusing on basic and 

fundamental research at our national labs provides the best opportunity for innovation and economic growth. 

The DOE Science and Innovation Act authorizes funding for critical infrastructure 

projects at these national labs. In the Basic Energy Sciences program, it authorizes 

upgrades to world-leading x-ray light source facilities around the country, like the 

Advanced Photon Source at Argonne National Laboratory, and the LINAC Coherent Light Source at SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory. 

These facilities give American scientists the tools they need to study the structure 

and behavior of physical and biological materials, enabling innovation in many 

fields, including creating new materials for industry and developing new pharmaceuticals. 

This legislation also authorizes the construction of new DOE research facilities in 

nuclear physics and high energy physics. 

This includes construction of the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB) at Michigan State University, which will enable critical nuclear physics research across a 

wide breadth of fields, ranging from astrophysics to medicine, and the construction 

of the Long-Baseline Neutrino Facility at Fermilab, an internationally coordinated 

project designed to build the world’s highest intensity neutrino beam. The research 

at this facility will help shed light on the universe and its origins. 

This bill also specifically authorizes basic research in fields that are critical to 

U.S. dominance in science and technology. It authorizes research in exascale computing, electricity storage and fusion energy sciences. It establishes a DOE Exascale 

Computing Program, a low dose radiation research program, and programs for managing our Energy Frontier Research Centers and Bioenergy Research Centers and 

ensures that we fulfill our commitments to the ITER project for fiscal years 2018 

and 2019. 

Significant investments in basic science research by foreign countries, like China, 

threaten America’s global standing as the leader in scientific knowledge. To maintain our competitive advantage as a world leader in science, we must continue to 

support the research, and the research infrastructure, that will lead to next generation energy technologies. 

H.R. 5905 is a common sense bill that will maintain American leadership in 

science. I want to thank Chairman Smith, Rep. Lofgren, Vice Chairman Lucas and 

many of my Science Committee colleagues for cosponsoring this important legislation. I’m grateful for the opportunity to work with the members of this committee 

to guide research that will help America compete around the world. 

I encourage my colleagues to support this bill and I yield back the balance of my 

time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Weber, and I’m going to go 

first to the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Foster, and then to the 

gentleman from New York, Mr. Tonko. 
603 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the last 

word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman’s recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you again, Chairman Smith and Ranking 

Member Johnson, for holding this markup and for allowing me to 

say a few words. 

I’m pleased to see that this comprehensive bill authorizing funding for the Department of Energy Office of Science includes two important projects: Argonne’s Advanced Photon Source and 

Fermilab’s Long-Baseline Neutrino Facility. I especially want to 

thank my colleague, Mr. Weber, for sponsoring this important legislation, and also for leading a delegation of Science Committee 

Members to visit Fermilab and Argonne a few weeks ago, and several of my colleagues on this Committee saw firsthand on that congressional delegation trip the cutting-edge science conducted at Argonne and at the user facilities they support are critical to U.S. industry and academic science. 

Argonne’s Advanced Photon Source, or APS, supports discovery 

science and market-driven research on materials, chemistry, physics, and biology. The APS is a user facility for thousands of academic national lab and industry scientists across the country. The 

APS has allowed scientists to visualize everything from nanoscale 

materials to high-speed liquid jets. The APS also facilitates development of products from solar shingles to drugs to treat HIV. The 

upgrade authorized in this bill will leverage existing infrastructure 

to create a world-leading facility at substantially less cost than a 

new facility. This upgrade will enable the APS to become the ultimate 3D microscope, opening up scientific frontiers at the 

nanoscale that are completely inaccessible today. Without it, the 

United States will lose its global leadership in x-ray science. 

The second critical project that this bill authorizes is the LBNF 

DUNE project, which is critical to maintaining U.S. leadership in 

high-energy physics and fundamental science. The Long-Baseline 

Neutrino Facility at Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois, will power the 

Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment at the Sanford Underground Research Facility in Lead, South Dakota. LBNF DUNE will 

bring us great understanding of neutrinos, the most abundant and 

mysterious matter particles in the universe. LBNF DUNE will also 

be the first major international mega science project to be hosted 

by the Department of Energy in the United States. The LBNF 

DUNE international collaboration involves 1,000 scientists and engineers from 30 countries around the world. 

On the congressional delegation tour of Fermilab earlier this 

month, several of my colleagues on the Science Committee were 

able to personally see some of the high-tech leading-edge work 

being done in high-energy physics and to meet many of my old 

friends from Argonne and Fermilab, where I worked for over 20 

years. The work at these national labs is critical to maintaining our 

U.S. scientific leadership, and in fact, earlier this year I was proud 

to personally escort Secretary Perry on his visits to both Argonne 

and Fermilab and was thrilled to see his genuine enthusiasm for 

the science that is done there. This bill takes the important step 

of authorizing the funding for these projects in addition to pro-
604 

viding comprehensive authorization language for the DOE Office of 

Science. 

Science requires long-term and sustained funding in order to 

plan ahead and ensure opportunities are not missed, especially for 

large-scale, long-term projects such as these. This bill is an—— 

[Audio malfunction in hearing room] 

Ms. LOFGREN [continuing]. Like Lawrence Berkeley and SLAC 

near my district but also excellent facilities across the United 

States. They are Centers of Innovation in many subjects, and especially for energy, used by scientists, researchers, students, even the 

private sector. There’s a broad spectrum of topics where we see advances. 

Now, it’s no secret to Members of this Committee that I’ve been 

a longtime supporter and advocate for fusion energy research. A fusion has such a potential to provide abundant, reliable, emissionfree, and practically limitless energy that would satisfy our electricity needs for the foreseeable future. It’s a huge challenge. We 

have achieved fusion but not ignition so this is basically a research 

project at this point, but the potential benefits are so enormous for 

our world that it’s important that the research be continued, and 

that’s an additional reason why I am so pleased to be the Democratic cosponsor of this bill. In particular, I’m happy to see that it 

would establish an inertial fusion energy program that’s consistent 

with the 2013 National Academies report and include inertial and 

other innovative fusion concepts in the development of a comprehensive strategic plan for fusion, also has been mentioned, sufficient support for both the U.S. commitments to ITER’s international fusion project as well as the non-ITER portions of the fusion budget. 

I want to thank Mr. Weber for introducing this bill and just say 

I’m proud to be the lead Democratic sponsor of this bill, and I 

thank both Mr. Weber and the Chairman for recognizing me. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Lofgren. 

And the gentleman from New York, Mr. Tonko, is recognized. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move to strike the last 

word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, and thank you, Mr. Chair and Ranking 

Member Johnson, for this bill package that speaks significantly to 

our future, I believe. 

Before I offer my comments, I would that I could recognize Cheyenne, who is our rep from the foster family program that’s shadowing many of us today, and I thank Cheyenne for being here. 

The only way America will meet our greatest energy challenges 

is with smart, visionary investments in research and development. 

Our Federal Government has an exemplary record of partnering 

with universities and private-sector leaders to drive innovation including critical smartphone technologies and the framework for the 

internet. 

Groundbreaking advances by America’s private sector and university communities are propelled and even made possible by a 

public R&D portfolio that covers the spectrum from basic science 

to technology development, testing and deployment. Ongoing sup-
605 

port of these smart investments is essential to driving down costs 

and improving performance of advanced and everyday energy technologies. 

I am relieved to be working on a bipartisan basis to move this 

legislation forward to support American science and energy innovation. The Office of Science at DOE supports critical work that is 

producing major breakthroughs in science, in energy innovation, 

and, indeed, in national security. 

ARPA-E continues to play a critical role in expanding our portfolio of innovation programs and lowering risk on projects that advance the horizon of our discovery, a vial pathfinding tool for our 

future economy and national security that simply would not be 

supported by the private sector. Failing to adequately support and 

fund these critical initiatives will undermine development of our 

next generation of scientists and engineers and the transformative 

achievements they will be responsible for, and our Nation will future lose its standing as a world leader in energy innovation. We 

must press forward and innovate. 

Supporting such innovation must also mean support for adequate 

funding. I hope that this Committee continues to invest in America’s future and redouble our bipartisan commitment to this critical 

innovation. 

And with that, Mr. Chair, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Tonko. 

The only amendment to H.R. 5905 on the roster that I’m aware 

of is a Manager’s Amendment offered by the gentleman from 

Texas, Mr. Weber, and he’s recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. WEBER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at 

the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to Department of Energy and Science Innovation Act of 2018 offered by Mr. Weber of Texas, amendment 

#019. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. WEBER. Thank you, Chairman. 

This amendment provides for technical changes to the legislation. 

I do appreciate the opportunity to work with the Minority and to 

identify these changes prior to today’s markup and for their support of this important legislation authorizing the Department of 

Energy Office of Science. I encourage my colleagues to support the 

amendment, and with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Weber, and the Ranking Member is recognized. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’d like to strike the 

last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much. I support this Manager’s 

Amendment, which makes some positive changes to the bill. 

I’d also like to take a moment to thank both Chairman Smith 

and Subcommittee Chairman Weber and their staffs for working 

with us on this amendment. It’s a good amendment to a good bill, 

and I urge my colleagues to support it. 
606 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

If there’s no further discussion on the amendment, the question 

is on agreeing to the amendment offered by Mr. Weber. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Those opposed, say no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

If there are no further amendments, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 5905 to the House as amended with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 5905 to the House 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

Without objection, the Motion to Reconsider is laid upon the 

table. H.R. 5905 is ordered reported to the House, and I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any necessary technical and conforming changes. Without objection, so ordered. 

H.R. 5907 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 5907, 

the National Innovation Modernization by Laboratory Empowerment Act, and the clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 5907, a bill to provide Directors of the National 

Laboratories signature authority for certain agreements, and for 

other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

Chairman SMITH. I’ll recognize the bill’s sponsor, Mr. Hultgren, 

for his opening statement. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Thank you, Chairman, for this markup today 

and for all your help on this. I’d also like to thank the distinguished Chairman of the Energy Subcommittee for his help on the 

underlying bill. I’d also like to thank my colleague from Colorado, 

Mr. Perlmutter, for his help on this bipartisan legislation that 

would help our national labs better work with all businesses, but 

especially small businesses, by being more nimble and being able 

to quickly react to the needs of the private sector working with the 

labs. 

In the previous Congress, this House passed legislation I introduced with the gentleman from Colorado, which would do a number of things to modernize the national laboratories, including the 

provision we have introduced as a standalone today. In the 113th 

Congress, this House passed similar legislation without opposition. 

I’ve had the opportunity to visit a number of our national laboratories, and the thing they all have in common is the unique expertise they house and the world-leading instruments they maintain. 

They truly are the crown jewel in our research ecosystem, and this 

legislation would make it easier to access the labs for the general 

public. 

One of the primary issues I have heard about, with the public 

trying to work with our laboratories, is the time it takes for many 
607 

agreements to be worked out, often taking months after laboratory 

approval before final sign-off from the Department. Make no mistake: I believe oversight of our national labs by the Department is 

vital, and the labs must be aligned under the mission of the Department, but I do believe there should be some level of trust given 

to the labs to enter into smaller agreements. With this legislation, 

signature authority for cooperative research and development 

agreements, work-for-other agreements, and other agreements determined appropriate by DOE would be given to the labs so long 

as they totaled less than $1 million. With the increased reporting 

requirements for these agreements, I believe this strikes the proper 

balance for oversight with the Department and the intentions of 

Congress in creating the government-owned, contractor-operated 

model of the national labs. 

I’m grateful for the Secretary at our recent hearing signaling his 

willingness to work with this idea, and I believe it fits with the Administration’s priorities in removing red tape where it’s not needed 

and freeing the private sector up to innovate and bring new ideas 

to market. 

So again, thank you, Chairman. I want to thank also the gentleman from Colorado and all of my colleagues on the Committee 

for their support, and I urge passage of this important legislation. 

With that, I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. HULTGREN

Thank you Chairman Smith for this markup today. And I would like to thank the 

distinguished chairman of the Energy Subcommittee for his help on the underlying 

bill. 

I’d also like to thank my colleague from Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter, for his help 

on this bipartisan legislation that would help our national labs better work with all 

businesses-but especially small businesses-by being more nimble and quickly react 

to the needs of the private sector working with the labs. 

In the previous Congress, this House passed legislation I introduced with the gentleman from Colorado which would do a number of things to modernize the national 

laboratories, including the provision we have introduced as a standalone today. 

In the 113th Congress, this House passed similar legislation without opposition. 

I’ve had the opportunity to visit a number of our national laboratories, and the 

thing they all have in common is the unique expertise they house and the worldleading instruments they maintain. 

They truly are the crown jewel in our research ecosystem, and this legislation 

would make it easier to access the labs for the general public. 

One of the primary issues I have heard about, with the public trying to work with 

our laboratories, is the time it takes for many agreements to be worked out, often 

taking months after laboratory approval before final sign-off from the department. 

Make no mistake, I believe oversight of our national labs by the department is 

vital, and the labs must be aligned under the mission of the department, but I do 

believe there should be some level of trust given to the labs to enter into smaller 

agreements. 

With this legislation, signature authority for cooperative research and development agreements, work-for-other agreements and other agreements determined appropriate by DOE, would be given to the labs so long as they totaled less than $1 

million. 

With the increased reporting requirements for these agreements, I believe this 

strikes the proper balance for oversight with the department and the intentions of 

Congress in creating the government-owned, contractor-operated model of the national labs. 

I am grateful for the secretary at our recent hearing signaling his willingness to 

work with this idea, and I believe it fits with the administration’s priorities in removing red-tape where it is not needed and freeing the private sector up to innovate 

and bring new ideas to market. 
608 

So again, I thank the chairman, the gentleman from Colorado and all of my colleagues on the committee for their support, and I urge passage of this important 

legislation. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Hultgren. I appreciate that. 

And the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter, is recognized. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. 

Hultgren. I was surprised at the gentleman from Illinois that you 

didn’t talk about any of your labs or the universities of Illinois, but 

Dr. Foster took care of that, so I think you’re good. 

But I appreciate the gentleman for bringing this bill. It does give 

the opportunity to the directors of the labs to have authority and 

some discretion in dealing with contracts and agreements that are 

a million dollars or less. That will allow the labs to enter into these 

agreements in a much quicker basis but it doesn’t relieve us of 

oversight, doesn’t relieve the labs of auditing trails and appropriate 

accounting for these kinds of things but it does allow them to enter 

into contracts on a much quicker basis. 

So I think this is a good bill. It was part of the overall Modernization of our Laboratories Act that Mr. Hultgren and I sponsored earlier. This piece, I think, should move very quickly through 

the process, and as this Committee knows, I represent Golden, Colorado, and the National Renewable Energy Lab. NREL is the premiere, energy efficiency and renewable energy lab in the world, and 

for more than 40 years, NREL has led the charge in research and 

design of renewable-energy products directly affecting the way we 

utilize and secure American energy. 

This bill would allow that director of that laboratory to enter into 

contracts of a million dollars or less without going through a whole 

bunch of levels of approval. Obviously over that, then the approval 

process kicks in but the auditing process to make sure that there 

isn’t any funny business will always be there. So this gives us an 

opportunity to be nimble, as the title to the bill would suggest. It 

gives the opportunity to have discretion within our directors, who 

are all very accomplished individuals and will allow us to move 

quickly in a very fast field that is competitive all around the world. 

So I thank the gentleman from Illinois for bringing this bill and 

allowing me to cosponsor with him. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Perlmutter. 

If there are no amendments, a reporting quorum being present, 

I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 5907 to the House with the recommendation that the bill 

be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 5907 to the House. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

Without objection, the Motion to Reconsider is laid upon the 

table, and H.R. 5907 is ordered reported to the House. 

H.R. 5906 

Chairman SMITH. Now, pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 

5906, the ARPA-Act of 2018, and the clerk will report the bill. 
609 

The CLERK. H.R. 5906, a bill to amend the America COMPETES 

Act to establish Department of Energy policy for Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

Chairman SMITH. And the bill’s sponsor, the gentleman from 

Oklahoma, Mr. Lucas, is recognized for his opening statement. 

Mr. LUCAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to 

speak on behalf of this important legislation. 

The ARPA-E Act of 2018 requires the Department of Energy to 

refocus ARPA-E toward developing transformative science and 

technology solutions to address energy, environment, economic, and 

national security challenges. 

ARPA-E was created to ensure that the U.S. energy sector maintained a competitive edge in developing energy technologies. The 

program was established to help develop high-potential, high-impact energy technologies that were too early stage to attract private-sector investment. ARPA-E was designed to provide finite research and development funding for a limited time, with the intention to have quick, notable impact on the development of new energy technologies. In order to accomplish this, ARPA-E was given 

a unique management structure, with flexibility start and stop research projects that are no longer achieving individual goals, expedited hiring and firing authority to make sure ARPA-E staff could 

adequately select and support projects, and the tools to identify 

market challenges that could affect the advancement in project 

technologies. 

However, there are a number of issues that have made ARPAE controversial over the years. The first is the worry this is just 

more of the same from the Department of Energy. After all, with 

the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy program funded at 

over $2.3 billion, why did we need another clean energy program? 

Second, we’ve heard concerns over the years that ARPA-E wasn’t 

meeting its intended goal—to fund the kind of technologies that are 

so innovative they would never attract private-sector investment— 

but was instead providing funding to big companies with access to 

market capital, or funding research that was already underway in 

other Federal agencies, or in the private sector. I believe that while 

these are valid concerns, ARPA-E is a program that can and has 

had tremendous impact on the development of new energy technologies. 

Over the 10-years after its establishment, the bill we will consider today will both address these concerns, and enable ARPA-E 

to apply its innovative approach to a broader set of technology challenges. 

The reforms in this legislation will expand the mission of ARPAE to include the full DOE mission, and empower the agency to promote science and technology-driven solutions to DOE’s broad mission goals. Following the mission of the Department, the ARPA-E 

Act of 2018 will allow the agency to solve big challenges, like nuclear waste management and cleanup, reducing the environmental 

impact of energy production, and improving the reliability, resiliency, and security of the electric grid. 
610 

The bill also provides the Secretary with flexibility to identify additional challenges for ARPA-E to address within the core mission 

of the Department. The ARPA-E Act also takes important steps to 

prevent the duplication of research across DOE and to require applicants to indicate that they have attempted to find private-sector 

financing for a particular technology. This good-governance provision ensures limited taxpayer dollars are spent on the most innovative and transformative technologies, not in competition with the 

private sector. 

With the right mission goals and management, I believe ARPAE’s innovative approach can build on the basic science and early 

stage research at the Department, and help fast-track new technologies that will grow our economy. 

Once again, I’d like to thank Chairman Smith for supporting this 

legislation. I’d also to thank Ranking Member Johnson for cosponsoring this bipartisan bill. I encourage my colleagues to support the 

bill, and I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Chairman. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. LUCAS

Thank you, Chairman Smith, for the opportunity to speak on behalf of this important legislation. 

The ARPA-E Act of 2018 requires the Department of Energy (DOE) to refocus 

ARPA-E towards developing transformative science and technology solutions to address energy, environment, economic and national security challenges. 

ARPA-E was created to ensure the U.S. energy sector maintained a competitive 

in developing emerging energy technologies. The program was established to help 

develop ‘‘high-potential, high-impact energy technologies’’ that were too early stage 

to attract private sector investment. 

ARPA-E was designed to provide finite research and development funding for a 

limited time, with the intention to have quick, notable impact on the development 

of new energy technologies. In order to accomplish this goal, ARPA-E was given a 

unique management structure, with flexibility start and stop research projects that 

are no longer achieving individual goals, expedited hiring and firing authority to 

make sure ARPA-E staff could adequately select and support projects, and the tools 

to identify market challenges that could affect the advancement in project technologies. 

However, there are a number of issues that have made ARPA-E controversial over 

the years. The first is the worry this is just more of the same from the Department 

of Energy. After all, with the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy program 

funded at over $2.3 billion, why did we need another clean energy program? 

Second, we’ve heard concerns over the years that ARPA-E wasn’t meeting its intended goal-to fund the kind of technologies that are so innovative they would never 

attract private sector investment-but was instead providing funding to big companies with access to market capital, or funding research that was already underway 

in other federal agencies, or in the private sector. 

I believe that while these are valid concerns, ARPA-E is a program that can and 

has had tremendous impact on the development of new energy technologies. Over 

ten years after its establishment, the bill we will consider today will both address 

these concerns, and enable ARPA-E to apply its innovative approach to a broader 

set of technology challenges. 

This legislation will expand the mission of ARPA-E to include the full DOE mission, and empower the agency to promote science and technology driven solutions 

to DOE’s broad mission goals. 

Following the mission of the department, the ARPA-E Act of 2018 will allow the 

agency to solve big challenges, like nuclear waste management and clean-up, reducing the environmental impact of energy production, and improving the reliability, 

resiliency and security of the electric grid. 

The bill also provides the secretary with the flexibility to identify additional challenges for ARPA-E to address within the core mission of the department. 

The ARPA-E Act also takes important steps to prevent the duplication of research 

across DOE and to require applicants to indicate that they have attempted to find 

private sector financing for a particular technology. 
611 

This good governance provision ensures limited taxpayer dollars are spent on the 

most innovative and transformative technologies, not in competition with the private sector. 

With the right mission goals and management, I believe ARPA-E’s innovative approach can build on the basic science and early-stage research at the department, 

and help fast track new technologies that will grow our economy. 

Once again, I would like to thank Chairman Smith for supporting this important 

legislation. I also want to thank Ranking Member Johnson for cosponsoring this bipartisan legislation. I encourage my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back 

the balance of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lucas. 

And the gentlewoman from Texas, the Ranking Member, is recognized for her comments. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I have spoken on this bill in the opening statement so I’ll be 

brief. I just want to thank Mr. Lucas for sponsoring this bill, which 

I am cosponsoring. 

ARPA-E is widely considered one of the most successful and costeffective programs at the Department of Energy. I am a big supporter of their work, and as the appropriators’ process moves forward, I hope that we can work together to ensure that this program is fully funded. 

I want to again thank Mr. Lucas and Chairman Smith for working with us. I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

The only amendment on the roster is a Manager’s Amendment 

offered by the gentleman from Oklahoma—oh, I am sorry. The gentleman from California, Mr. McNerney, is recognized. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. I move to strike the last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. I thank the Chairman for bringing these bills 

today. 

I want to second the comments of my colleague from California, 

Ms. Lofgren. The national labs are a tremendous asset for our Nation. I worked at the Sandia National Lab in Albuquerque for a 

number of years, and I saw the tremendous resource of innovative 

talent and innovative drive that my colleagues had at the labs. 

Livermore National Lab is right outside of my district, and I see 

the passion of people that work there so I appreciate their work, 

and this Committee should continue to support the work that’s conducted by our national laboratories. In particular, I support the nuclear fusion programs. Again, like Ms. Lofgren, I see tremendous 

potential for that technology as it matures. 

And I also want to say that ARPA-E, the bill under discussion 

now, has been a real opportunity for energy innovation, which is 

badly needed. We do have energy challenges in this country. We 

need to address climate change, and ARPA-E is a tremendous tool 

for doing that. 

So I support the bill and I support the Chairman and the Ranking Member, and my friend from Oklahoma, Mr. Lucas, for bringing this forward. I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. McNerney. 

And the gentlewoman from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici, is recognized. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I want 

to join my colleagues in offering support for this important bill, and 

thank Mr. Lucas and Ranking Member Johnson for bringing it for-
612 

ward, and also say that I’m pleased that we’re doing this bipartisan 

package of bills today. 

I also want to ask the Science Committee to welcome my foster 

intern for the day, Isaiah Paloma. Isaiah spent time—although he 

lives in Oregon now, he spent time in the Idaho foster youth system, serving on the Idaho Foster Youth Advisory Board. He now 

lives in Seaside, Oregon, in the district I’m honored to represent, 

and is part of the congressional Foster Youth Shadow program, and 

I want to say, Mr. Chairman and Committee Members, I think it’s 

really important that we’re doing this package of bipartisan bills 

today when we have foster youth here from around the country to 

show them that we are able to work together and willing to invest 

in something as important as research and innovation into our energy future. 

So thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, colleagues. Yes, 

Isaiah is here today sitting behind me today. Thank you so much 

for bringing this package of bills forward. I look forward to supporting them here in the Committee and on the floor, and I yield 

back. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici. 

The only amendment on the roster is a Manager’s Amendment—— 

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SMITH [continuing]. By the gentleman of Oklahoma, 

and he’s recognized for purposes of offering that amendment. 

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 5906 offered by Mr. Lucas of 

Oklahoma, amendment #008. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. LUCAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

This amendment provides for technical changes to the legislation. 

I appreciate the opportunity to work with the Minority to identify 

these changes prior to today’s markup and for their support on this 

important legislation. 

I encourage my colleagues to vote for this amendment, and with 

that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lucas. 

Is there any further discussion on the amendment? 

The gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson, is recognized. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to strike the 

last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you. 

I want to thank Mr. Lucas for offering the amendment, which I 

support. The amendment makes minor but helpful changes to the 

base bill. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment, and I 

yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. This is going very 

quickly. 

Is there any further discussion? Any further amendments? 
613 

If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by 

Mr. Lucas. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

If there is no—if there are no further amendments, a reporting 

quorum being present, I move that the Committee on Science, 

Space, and Technology report H.R. 5906 as amended to the House 

with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 5906 to the House 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

Without objection, the Motion to Reconsider is laid upon the 

table. H.R. 5906 is ordered reported to the House, and I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any necessary technical and conforming changes, and without objection, so ordered. 

I hope all Members will stay in the room just for a minute. I’ve 

got three announcements I’d like to make, so if you all will stay 

close by? 

The first is to welcome our newest Member of the Science Committee, and that is Arizona’s newest Member of the House, Debbie 

Lesko. She served in the Arizona House of Representatives for 6 

years and then in the Arizona Senate, where she was President Pro 

Tem from 2017 to 2018. Representative Lesko has a keen interest 

in STEM education and the right kind of climate change. We look 

forward to having her expertise and perspective on the Committee. 

Welcome, Debbie. 

Second announcement that particularly the Members to my right 

may be interested in knowing is that of the 32 bills this Committee 

has approved, 28 of the 32 are bipartisan and have been bipartisan 

bills. That’s as good as it gets. OK. 

And the last announcement is sort of a mixed announcement, 

and it is with gratitude for Molly Fromm’s skills and with excitement for her next step that I have to announce that our General 

Counsel and the woman either sitting next to me or behind me will 

leave the Science Committee this Friday, day after tomorrow, after 

3–1/2 years. Molly is a native of La Jolla, California, otherwise 

known as far west Texas. Before joining the Science Committee, 

Molly worked with my California colleague, Representative Darrell 

Issa, for a decade, first in his personal office and then as Deputy 

General Counsel and Parliamentarian for the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. Molly has served the Science Committee tirelessly and well during the 114th and 115th Congresses. 

She understands Committee and House procedures. She works 

hard, and she has helped the Committee advance numerous pieces 

of legislation. Though we are sad to see her go, we’re glad she 

won’t be going far. Molly will take over as General Counsel and 

Parliamentarian for the House Financial Services Committee under 

my friend and Texas Colleague, Chairman Jed Hensarling. We 

wish Molly, her husband Adam, and her son, Patrick, who just 

turned one this past weekend, a happy future as they embark on 
614 

a new adventure. So Molly, we will miss you but we will continue 

to appreciate all your good work. 

She—well, I’ll stop there except that she has a great—look at her 

dress closely is all I can tell you. Those are wonderful red elephants. It’s my—I used to have a tie that matched it but I don’t 

know what I’ve done with it. I would have worn it today. But anyway, Molly, thank you again. 

I thank all the Members for being here. I appreciate everybody’s 

attendance, and we stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:20 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 
(615) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 5905, AMENDMENT ROSTER, H.R. 5907, H.R. 5906, 

AMENDMENT ROSTER
616 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

115TII CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H.R. 

(Original Signature of Member) 

To authorize basic research programs in the Department of Energy Office 

of Science for fiseal years 2018 and 2019. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

Mr. WEBER of Texas introduced the follo~~ng bill; which was refen·ed to the 

Committee on------·--··--·------

A BILL 

To authorize basic research programs in the Department 

of Energy Office of Science for fiscal years 2018 and 2019. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

4 (a) SHORT TITLE.-This Act may be cited as the 

5 "Department of Energy Science and Innovation Act of 

6 2018". 

7 (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.-The table of contents for 

8 this Act is as follows: 

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 

Sec. 2. Definitions. 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
617 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_ZO 18_00 1.XML 

2 

Sec. 3. Mission. 

Sec. 4. Basic energy sciences. 

Sec. 3. Advanced scientific computing research. 

Sec. 6. High energy physics. 

Sec. 7. Biological and environmental research. 

Sec. R. Fusion energy. 

Sec. ~J. Nuclear ph)-sics. 

Sec. 10. Science laboratories infrastructure program. 

Sec. 1 L Authorization of appropriations. 

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

2 In this Act: 

3 (1) DEPARTMENT.-The term "Department" 

4 means the Department of Energy. 

5 (2) DIRECTOR-The term "Director" means 

6 the Director of the Office of Science of the Depart7 mcnt. 

8 (3) NATIONAL LABORATORY.-The term "Na9 tional Laboratory" has the meaning given that term 

10 in section 2 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 ( 42 

11 U.S.C. 15801). 

12 ( 4) SJ<JCRE'rARY.-The term "Secretary" means 

13 the Secretary of Energy. 

14 SEC. 3. l\fiSSION. 

15 Section 209 of the Department of Energy Organiza16 tion Act (42 U.S.C. 7139) is amended by adding at the 

17 end the following: 

18 "(c) MISSION.-Thc mission of the Office of Science 

19 shall be the delivery of scientific discoveries, capabilities, 

20 and major scientific tools to transform the understanding 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
618 

G:\CMTE\S015\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

3 

of nature and to advance the energy, economic, and na2 tional security of the United States.". 

3 SEC. 4. BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES. 

4 (a) PROGRA..l\1..-The Director shall carry out a pro5 gram in basic energy sciences, including materials sciences 

6 and engineering, chemical sciences, physical biosciences, 

7 and geosciences, for the purpose of providing the scientific 

8 foundations for new energy technologies. 

9 (b) MISSION.-'l'he mission of the program described 

10 in subsection (a) shall be to support fundamental research 

11 to understand, predict, and ultimately control matter and 

12 energy at the electronic, atomic, and molecular levels in 

13 order to provide the foundations for new energy tech14 nologies and to support Department missions in energy, 

15 environment, and national security. 

16 (c) BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES USER FACILITHJS.-

17 (1) IN GENER.A.h-The Director shall carry out 

18 a program for the development, construction, oper19 ation, and maintenance of national user facilities. 

20 (2) REQUIRElllENTS.-To the maximum extent 

21 practicable, the national user facilities developed, 

22 constructed, operated, or maintained under para23 graph (1) shall serve the needs of the Department, 

24 industry, the academic community, and other rei25 evant entities to create and examine materials and 

g:\VHLC\052118\05211 B.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
619 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

4 

chemical processes for the purpose of improving the 

2 competitiveness of the United States. 

3 (3) INCLUDED FACILITIES.-The national user 

4 facilities developed, constructed, operated, or main5 tained under paragraph (1) shall include6 (A) x-ray light sources; 

7 (B) neutron sources; 

8 (C) nanoscale science research centers; and 

9 (D) such other facilities as the Director 

10 considers appropriate, consistent vvith section 

11 209 of the Department of Energy Organization 

12 Act (42 U.S.C. 7139). 

13 (d) BASIC ENEHGY SCIENCES RESEARCH lNFRA14 STHUCTUHE.-

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21.2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(1) ADVk~CED PHOTON SOURCE UPGRADE.-

(A) IN GI<JNERAL.-The Secretary shall 

provide for the upgrade to the Advanced Photon Source described in the publication approved by the Basic Energy Sciences Advisory 

Committee on June 9, 2016, titled "Report on 

Facility Upgrades", including the development 

of a multi-bend aehromat lattice to produce a 

high flux of coherent x-rays within the hard xray energy region and a suite of beamlines optimized for this source. 

(692785113) 
620 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

5 

(B) DEFINITIONS.-ln this paragraph: 

(i) Frxx.-The term "flux" means 

the rate of flow of photons. 

(ii) HARD X-RAY.-The term "hard xray'' means a photon with energy greater 

than 20 kiloelectron volts. 

(C) START OF OPEIL'\TIONS.-The Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable, 

ensure that the start of full operations of the 

upgrade under this paragraph occurs before December 31, 2025. 

(D) FeNDING.-Out of funds authorized 

to be appropriated under section 11 for Basic 

Energy Sciences, there shall be made available 

to the Secretary to cany out the upgrade under 

this paragraph-

(i) $93,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

and 

(ii) $130,000,000 for fiscal year 2019. 

(2) SPALI~TION NEUTRON SOURCE PROTON 

21 POWER VPGRADE.-

22 (A) IN GENERAL.-The Secretmy shall 

23 provide for a proton power upgrade to the 

24 Spallation Neutron Source. 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
621 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

6 

(B) DEFINITION OF PROTON POWJ<JR l:PGRADE.-For the purposes of this paragraph, 

the term "proton power upgrade" means the 

Spallation Neutron Source power upgrade described in-

(i) the publication of the Office of 

Science of the Department of Energy titled 

"Facilities for the Future of Science: A 

Twenty-Year Outlook", published December 2003; 

(ii) the publication of the Office of 

Science of the Department of Energy titled 

"Four Years Later: An Interim Report on 

Facilities for the Future of Science: A 

Twenty-Year Outlook", published August 

2007; and 

(iii) the publication approved by the 

Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee 

ou June 9, 2016, titled "Report on Facility Upgrades". 

(C) START 01<' OPERATIONS.-The Secretary shall, to the maximum ex'tent practicable, 

ensure that the start of full operations of the 

upgrade under this paragraph occnrs before December :n, 2025. 

(692785113) 
622 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

7 

(D) FUNDING.-Out of funds authorized 

2 to be appropriated under section 11 for Basic 

3 Energy Sciences, there shall be made available 

4 to the Secretary to carry out the upgrade under 

5 this paragraph6 (i) $36,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

7 and 

8 (ii) $60,800,000 for fiscal year 2019. 

9 (3) SPAI"LATION NEUTRON SOURCE SECOND 

10 TARGE'l' S'l'A'l'ION.-

11 (A) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary shall 

12 provide for a second target station for the 

13 Spallation Neutron Source. 

14 (B) DEFINITION OF SECOND TARGET STA15 TION.-For the purposes of this paragraph, the 

16 term "second targ·et station" means the Spa\l17 ation Neutron Source second target station de18 scribed in19 (i) the publication of the Office of 

20 Science of the Department of Energy titled 

21 "Facilities for the F'uture of Science: A 

22 Twenty-Year Outlook", published Decem23 ber 2003; 

24 (ii) the publieation of the Office of 

25 Seience of the Department of Energy titled 

g:IVHLC\0521181052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
623 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

IO 

II 

12 

13 

I4 

I5 

I6 

17 

18 

I9 

20 

2I 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\05211 8\05211 8.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

8 

"Four Years Ijater: An Interim Report on 

Facilities for the Future of Science: A 

Twenty-Year Outlook", published August 

2007; and 

(iii) the publication approved by the 

Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee 

Oil June 9, 2016, titled "Report on Facility Upgrades". 

(C) START OF OPERATIONS.-'fhe Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable, 

ensure that the start of full operations of the 

second target station under this paragraph occurs before December 31, 2030, with the option 

for early operation in 2028. 

(D) PUNDING.-Out of funds authorized 

to be appropriated under section 11 for Basic 

Energy Sciences, there shall be made available 

to the Secretary to carry out activities, including construction, under this paragraph-

(i) $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

and 

(ii) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2019. 

(4) ADVANCED I"IGHT SOURCE UPGRADE.-

(A) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary shall 

provide for the upgrade to the Advanced Light 

(692785113) 
624 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

9 

Source described in the publication approved by 

the Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee 

on ,June 9, 2016, titled "Report on Facility Upgrades", including the development of a multibend achromat lattice to produce a high flux of 

coherent x-rays within the soft x-ray energy regwn. 

(B) DEFINITIONS.-ln this paragTaph: 

(i) FLUX.-'fhe term "flux" means 

the rate of flow of photons. 

(ii) SOF'r X-RAY.-'fhe term "soft xray" means a photon with energy in the 

range from 50 to 2,000 electron volts. 

(C) START OF OPERATIONS.-'fhe Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable, 

ensure that the start of full operations of the 

upgrade under this paragraph occurs before December 31, 2026. 

(D) FUNDING.-Out of funds authorized 

to be appropriated under section 11 for Basic 

Energy Sciences, there shall be made available 

to the Secretary to carry out the upgrade under 

this paragraph-

(i) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

and 

(692785113) 
625 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

10 

(ii) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2019. 

2 (5) LINAC COHERE~T LIGHT SOURCE II HIGH 

3 E~ERGY UPGRADE.-

4 (A) I~ GENERAI,.-The Secretary shall 

5 provide for the upgrade to the Linac Coherent 

6 Light Source II facility described in the publi7 cation approved by the Basic Energy Sciences 

8 Advisory Committee on June 9, 2016, titled 

9 "Report on "B'acility UpgTades", including the 

lO development of experimental capabilities for 

11 high energy x-rays to reveal fundamental scl12 entifie discoveries. The Secretary shall ensure 

13 the upgrade under this paragraph enables the 

14 production and use of high energy, ultra-short 

15 pulse x-rays delivered at a high repetition rate. 

16 (B) DEFINITIONS.-ln this paragTaph: 

17 (i) HIGH E~EIWY X-RAY.-The term a 

18 "high energy x-ray" means a photon with 

19 an energy at or exceeding 12 kiloelectron 

20 volts. 

21 (ii) HIGH REPETITION RATE.-The 

22 term "high repetition rate" means the de23 livery of x-ray pulses up to one million 

24 pulses per second. 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
626 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_20 18_00 I.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

11 

(iii) ULTRA-SHORT PULSE X-RAYS.-

The term "ultra-short pulse x-rays" means 

x-ray bursts capable of durations of less 

than one hundred femtoseconds. 

(C) START OF OPE&'l'riO~s.-The Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable, 

ensure that the start of full operations of the 

upgrade under this paragraph occurs before December 31, 2025. 

(D) FUNDING.-Out of funds authorized 

to be appropriated under section 11 for Basic 

Energy Sciences, there shall be made available 

to the Seeretary to carry out the upgrade under 

this paragraph-

(i) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; 

and 

(ii) $55,000,000 for fiscal year 2019. 

18 (e) ACCELERATOR RESEARCH AL'-'D DEVELOP19 MENT.-The Director shall carry out research and devel20 opment on advanced accelerator and storage ring tech21 nologies relevant to the development of Basic Energy 

22 Sciences user facilities, in consultation with the Office of 

23 Science's High Energy Physics and Nuclear Physics pro24 grams. 

25 (f) SOLAR E'UELS RESEARCH INITIATIVE.-

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21. 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
627 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

12 

(1) IN GENERAh-Section 973 of the Energy 

2 Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16313) is amended 

3 to read as follows: 

4 "SEC. 973. SOLAR FUELS RESEARCH INITIATIVE. 

5 "(a) INITIATIVE.-

6 "(1) IN GENERiUJ.-The Secretary shall carry 

7 out a research initiative, to be known as the 'Solar 

8 Fuels Research Initiative' (referred to in this section 

9 as the 'Initiative') to expand theoretical and fundal 0 mental knowledg·e of photochemistry, electro11 chemistry, biochemistry, and materials science useful 

12 for the practical development of experimental sys13 terns to convert solar energy to chemical energy. 

14 "(2) LEVERAGING.-In carrying out programs 

15 and activities under the Initiative, the Secretary 

16 shall leverage expertise and resources from17 "(A) the Basic Energy Sciences Program 

18 and the Biological and Environmental Research 

19 Program of the Office of Science; and 

20 "(B) the Office of Energy Efficiency and 

21 Renewable Energy. 

22 "(3) TEAl\:IS.-

23 "(A) IN GENERAL.-In carrying out the 

24 Initiative, the Secretary shall organize activities 

25 among multidisciplinary teams to leverage, to 

g:\VHLC\0521181052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17 p.m.) 

(692785113) 
628 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_20 IS_OOI.XML 

13 

the maximum extent praetieable, expertise from 

2 the National Laboratories, institutions of higher 

3 education, and the private sector. 

4 "(B) GoALs.-The multidisciplinary teams 

5 described in subparagraph (A) shall pursue ag6 gressive, milestone-driven, basic research goals. 

7 "(C) RESOURCES.-The Secretary shall 

8 provide sufficient resources to the multidisci9 plinary teams described in subparagraph (A) to 

10 achieve the goals described in subparagraph (B) 

11 over a period of time to be determined by the 

12 Secretary. 

13 "(4) ADDITIONAl, ACTIVITIES.-The Secretary 

14 may organize additional activities under this sub15 section through Energy Frontier Research Centers, 

16 Energy Innovation Hubs, or other organizational 

17 structures. 

18 "(b) ARTIFICIAL PHOTOSYNTHESIS.-

19 "(1) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary shall carry 

20 out under the Initiative a program to support re21 search needed to bridge scientific barriers to, and 

22 discover knowledge relevant to, artificial photOS)'ll23 thetic systems. 

24 "(2) ACTIVITIES.-As part of the program de25 scribed in paragraph (1)-

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
629 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

14 

"(A) the Director of the Office of Basic 

2 Energy Sciences shall support basic research to 

3 pursue distinct lines of scientific inquiry, in4 cluding5 "(i) photoinduced production of hy6 drogen and oxygen from water; and 

7 "(ii) the sustainable photoinduced re8 duction of carbon dioxide to fuel products 

9 including hydrocarbons, alcohols, carbon 

10 monoxide, and natural gas; and 

11 "(B) the Assistant Secretary for Energy 

12 Efficiency and Renewable Energy shall support 

13 translational research, development, and valida14 tion of physical concepts developed under the 

15 program. 

16 "(3) STA.'\'DARD OF RE"VIEW.-The Secretary 

17 shall review activities carried out under the program 

18 described in paragraph (1) to determine the achieve19 ment of technical milestones. 

20 "(4) FUNDING.-

21 "(A) IN GENERAL.-From within funds 

22 authorized to be appropriated under section 11 

23 of the Department of Energy Science and Inno24 vation Act of 2018, for Basic Energy Sciences, 

25 the Secretary shall make available for carrying 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
630 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

15 

1 out activities under this subsection $50,000,000 

2 for each of fiscal years 2018 through 2019. 

3 "(B) PROHIBITION.-No funds allocated to 

4 the program described in paragraph (1) may be 

5 obligated or expended for commercial applica6 tion of energy technology. 

7 "(c) BIOCHEMISTRY, REPJ,ICATION OF' ~ATURAL 

8 PHOTOSYNTHESIS, Al"\'D REL..~TED PROCESSES.-

9 "(1) IN GENERAh-The Secretary shall carry 

10 out under the Initiative a progTam to support re11 search needed to replicate natural photosynthetic 

12 proeesses by use of artificial photosynthetic compo13 nents and materials. 

14 "(2) ACTIVITIES.-As part of the program de15 scribed in paragraph (1)-

16 "(A) the Director of the Office of Basic 

17 Energy Sciences shall support basic research to 

18 expand fundamental knowledge to replicate nat19 ural synthesis processes, including20 "(i) the photoinduced reduction of 

21 dinitrogen to ammonia; 

22 "(ii) the absorption of carbon dioxide 

23 from ambient air; 

24 "(iii) molecular-based charge separa25 tiou and storage; 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
631 

G:\CMTE\SC\\5\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

1 

2 

3 

and 

16 

"(iv) photoinitiated electron transfer; 

"(v) catalysis in biological or bio4 mimetic systems; 

5 "(B) the Associate Director of Biological 

6 and Environmental Research shall support sys7 terns biology and genomics approaches to uu8 derstand genetic and physiological pathways 

9 connected to photosynthetic mechanisms; and 

10 "(C) the Assistant Secretary for Energy 

11 Efficiency and Renewable Energy shall support 

12 translational research, development, and valida13 tion of physical concepts developed under the 

14 program. 

15 "(3) STANDARD <W REv!EW.-Thc Secretary 

16 shall review activities carried out under the program 

17 described in paragTaph (1) to determine the achieve18 ment of teehnical milestones. 

19 "(4) J<""'UNDING.-

20 "(A) IN GENERAL.-From \vithin funds 

21 authorized to be appropriated under section 11 

22 of the Department of Energy Science and Inno23 vation Act of 2018, for Basic Energy Sciences 

24 and Biological and Environmental Research, 

25 the Secretary shall make available for carrying 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
632 

G:\CMTE\S015\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

17 

out activities under this subsection $50,000,000 

2 for each of fiscal years 2018 through 2019. 

3 "(B) PROHIBITION.-No funds allocated to 

4 the program described in paragraph (1) may be 

5 obligated or expended for commercial applica6 tion of energy technology.". 

7 (2) CONF'ORMING AMENDMENT.-The table of 

8 contents for the Energy Policy Act of 2005 is 

9 amended by striking the item relating to section 973 

10 and inserting the follo"ing: 

"Sec. 973. Solar fuels research initiative.". 

11 (g·) ELECTRICITY STORAGE RESEARCH INITIA12 TIVE.-

13 (1) IN GENERAL.-Section 975 of the Energy 

14 Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16315) is amended 

15 to read as follows: 

16 "SEC. 975. ELECTRICITY STORAGE RESEARCH INITIATIVE. 

17 "(a) lNITIATIVE.-

18 "(1) IN GENEHAJJ.-The Secretary shall carry 

19 out a research initiative, to be known as the 'Elec20 tricity Storage Research Initiative' (referred to in 

21 this section as the 'Initiative')-

22 "(A) to expand theoretical and funda23 mental knowledge to control, store, and con24 vertg:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
633 

G:\CMTE\SOI5\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00 l.XML 

18 

1 "(i) electrical energy to chemical en2 ergy; and 

3 "(ii) chemical energy to electrical en4 ergy; and 

5 "(B) to support scientific inquiry into the 

6 practical understanding of chemical and phys7 ical processes that occur ·within systems involv8 ing crystalline and amorphous solids, polymers, 

9 and organic and aqueous liquids. 

10 "(2) I~EYEIL.'I..GING.-In carrying out programs 

11 and activities under the Initiative, the Secretary 

12 shall leverage expertise and resources from13 "(A) the Basic Energy Sciences Program, 

14 the Advanced Scientific Computing Research 

15 ProgTam, and the Biological and Environmental 

16 Hescarch Program of the Office of Science; and 

17 "(B) the Office of Energy Efficiency and 

18 Renewable Energy. 

19 "(3) TEA:\18.-

20 "(A) IN GENERAh-In carrying out the 

21 Initiative, the Secretary shall organize activities 

22 among multidisciplinary teams to leverag·e, to 

23 the maximum extent practicable, expertise from 

24 the National Laboratories, institutions of higher 

25 education, and the private sector. 

g:\VHLC\052118\0521 1 8.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
634 

G:\CMTE\SC\IS\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

19 

''(B) GoAI,s.-The multidisciplinary teams 

2 described in subparagraph (A) shall pursue ag3 gressive, milestone-driven, basic research goals. 

4 "(C) RESOURCES.-The Secretary shall 

5 provide sufficient resources to the multidisci6 plinary teams described in subparagraph (A) to 

7 achieve the goals described in subparagraph (B) 

8 over a period of time to be determined by the 

9 Secretary. 

10 "(4) ADDITIONAL ACTIVITIES.-'l'he Secretary 

11 may organize additional activities under this sub12 section through Energy Frontier Research Centers, 

13 Energy Innovation Hubs, or other organizational 

14 structures. 

15 "(b) MULTIVALEN'l' SYSTEMS.-

16 "(1) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary shall carry 

17 out under the Initiative a program to support re18 search needed to bridge scientific barriers to, and 

19 discover knowledge relevant to, multivalent ion mate20 rials in electric energy storage systems. 

21 "(2) ACTIVITIES.-As part of the program de22 scribed in paragraph (1)-

23 "(A) the Director of the Office of Basic 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17 p.m.) 

Energy Sciences shall investigate electrochemical properties and the dynamics of mate-

(692785113) 
635 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

20 

1 rials, including charge transfer phenomena and 

2 mass transport in materials; and 

3 "(B) the Assistant Secretary for Energy 

4 Efficiency and Renewable Energy shall support 

5 translational research, development, and valida6 tion of physical concepts developed under the 

7 program. 

8 "(3) STANDARD OF REVIEW.-The Secretary 

9 shall review activities carried out under the program 

10 described in paragraph (1) to determine the achieve11 ment of technical milestones. 

12 "(4) :F'UNDING.-

13 "(A) IN GENERAh-From within funds 

14 authorized to be appropriated under section 11 

15 of the Department of Energy Science and Inno16 vation Act of 2018, for Basic Energy Sciences 

17 and Biological and Environmental Research, 

18 the Secretary shall make available for carrying 

19 out activities under this subsection $50,000,000 

20 for each of the fiscal years 2018 through '2019. 

21 "(B) PROHIBI'l'ION.-No funds allocated to 

22 the program described in paragraph (1) may be 

23 obligated or expended for commercial applica24 tion of energy technology. 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21.2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
636 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

21 

"(c) ErjECTROCHEMISTRY MoDEijiNG AND SIMULA2 TION.-

3 "(1) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary shall carry 

4 out under the Initiative a program to support re5 search to model and simulate organic electrolytes, 

6 including· the static and dynamic electrochemical be7 havior and phenomena of organic electrolytes at the 

8 molecular and atomic level in monovalent and multi9 valent systems. 

10 "(2) AcTIVITIES.-As part of the program dell scribed in paragraph (1)-

12 "(A) the Director of the Office of Basic 

13 Energy Sciences, in coordination with the Asso14 ciate Director of Advanced Scientific Com15 puting Research, shall support the development 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:IVHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

of high performance computational tools 

through a joint development process to maXImize the effectiveness of current and projected 

high performance computing systems; and 

"(B) the Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy shall support 

translational research, development, and validation of physical concepts developed under the 

program. 

(692785113) 
637 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

22 

1 "(3) STANDARD OF' REVIEW.-The Secretary 

2 shall review activities carried out under the program 

3 described in paragraph (1) to determine the achieve4 ment of technical milestones. 

5 "(4) l<'UNDING.-

6 "(A) IN GENERAL.-From within funds 

7 authorized to be appropriated under section 11 

8 of the Department of Energy Science and Inno9 vation Act of 2018, for Basic Energy Sciences 

10 and Advanced Scientific Computing Research, 

11 the Secretary shall make available for carrying 

12 out activities under this subseetion $30,000,000 

13 for each of the fiscal years 2018 through 2019. 

14 "(B) PROHIBITION.-No funds allocated to 

15 the program described in paragraph (1) may be 

16 obligated or expended for commercial applica17 tion of energy technology. 

18 "(d) MESOSCALE EI,ECTROCHEMISTRY.-

19 "(1) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary shall carry 

20 out under the Initiative a program to support re21 search needed to reveal electrochemistry in confined 

22 mesoscale spaces, including scientific discoveries rel23 evant tog:\VHLC\05211 B\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 201 B (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
638 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

23 

"(A) bio-electrochemistry and electro2 chemical energy conversion and storage in con3 fined spaces; and 

4 "(B) the dynamics of the phenomena de5 scribed in subparagnph (A). 

6 "(2) ACTIVITIES.-As part of the program de7 scribed in paragraph (1 )-

8 "(A) the Director of the Office of Basic 

9 Energy Sciences and the Associate Director of 

10 Biological and Environmental Research shall in11 vestigate phenomena of mesoscale electro12 chemical confinement for the purpose of repli13 eating and controlling new electrochemical be14 havior; and 

15 "(B) the Assistant Secretary for Energy 

16 Efficiency and Renewable Energy shall support 

17 translational research, development, and valida18 tion of physieal concepts developed under the 

19 program. 

20 "(3) S'L'ANDARD OF REVIEW.-The Secretary 

21 shall review activities carried out under the progTam 

22 described in paragraph (1) to determine the achieve23 ment of technical milestones. 

24 "( 4) FUNDING.-

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
639 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

24 

1 "(A) IN GENJ<JRAh-From within funds 

2 authorized to be appropriated under section 11 

3 of the Department of Energy Science and Inno4 vation Act of 2018, for Basic Energy Sciences 

5 and Biological and Environmental Research, 

6 the Secretary shall make available for carrying 

7 out activities under this subsection $20,000,000 

8 for each of fiscal years 2018 throug·h 2019. 

9 "(B) PROHIBITION.-No funds allocated to 

10 the program described in paragraph (1) may be 

11 obligated or expended for commercial applica12 tion of energy technology.". 

13 (2) CONFORMING AMENDl\IENT.-The table of 

14 contents for the Energy Policy Act of 2005 1s 

15 amended by striking the item relating to section 975 

16 and inserting the following: 

"Sec. 975. Electricity storage research initiative.". 

17 (h) ENERGY FRONTIER RESEAHCH CENTEHS.-

18 (1) IN GENERAh-The Director shall carry out 

19 a program to provide awards, on a competitive, 

20 merit-reviewed basis, to multi-institutional collabora21 tions or other appropriate entities to conduct funda22 mental and use-inspired energy research to accel23 erate scientific breakthroughs. 

g:\VHLC\0521 18\0521 1 8.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
640 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

25 

(2) COM~r'\BOBATIONS.-A collaboration receiv2 ing an award under this subsection may include mul3 tiple types of institutions and private sector entities. 

4 (3) SEI,ECTION AND DUBATION.-

5 (A) IN GENERAL.-A collaboration under 

6 this subsection shall be selected for a period of 

7 4 years. 

8 (B) EXISTING CENTERS.-An Energy 

9 Frontier Research Center in existence and sup10 ported by the Director on the date of enactment 

11 of this Act may continue to receive support for 

12 a period of 4 years beginning on the date of es13 tablishment of that center. 

14 (C) REAPPLICATION.-After the end of the 

15 period described in subparagraph (A) or (B), as 

16 applicable, a recipient of an award may reapply 

17 for selection on a competitive, merit-reYiewed 

18 basis. 

19 (D) TERMINA'fiON.-Consistent with the 

20 existing authorities of the Department, the Di21 rector may terminate an underperforming cen22 ter for cause during the performance period. 

23 (i) lVlATERIALS RESEARCH DATABASE.-

24 (1) IN GENERAL.-AR part of the program m 

25 materials sciences and engineering, the Director 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
641 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

26 

shall support the development of a web-based plat2 form to provide access to a database of computed in3 formation on known and predicted materials prop4 erties and computational tools to accelerate breakS throughs in materials discovery and design. 

6 (2) In carrying out this section, the Director 

7 shall8 (A) conduct cooperative research with in9 dustry, academia, and other research institu1 0 tions to facilitate the design of noyel materials; 

11 (B) leverage mcisting high performance 

12 computing systems to conduct high-throughput 

13 calculations, and develop computational and 

14 data mining algorithms for the prediction of 

15 material properties; 

16 (C) adYance understanding, prediction, and 

17 manipulation of materials; 

18 (D) strengthen the foundation for new 

19 technologies and advanced manufacturing; and 

20 (E) drive the development of advanced ma21 terials for applications that span the Depart22 ment's missions in energy, environment, and 

23 national security. 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
642 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

27 

1 (3) In carrying out this section, the Director 

2 shall leverage programs and activities across the De3 partment. 

4 SEC. 5. ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING RESEARCH. 

5 (a) PROGRAM.-The Director shall carry out a re6 search, development, and demonstration program to ad7 vance computational and networking capabilities to ana8 lyze, model, simulate, and predict complex phenomena rel9 evant to the development of new energy technologies and 

10 the competitiveness of the United States. 

11 (b) AMERICAN SUPEH COMPUTING LEADERSHIP.-

12 (1) RE~A.lVIING OF ACT.-

13 (A) TN GI<JNERAh-Section 1 of the De14 partment of Energy High-End Computing Revi15 talization Act of 2004 (15 U.S.C. 5501 note; 

16 Public Law 108-423) is amended by striking 

17 "Department of Energy High-End Computing 

18 Revitalization Act of 2004" and inserting 

19 "American Super Computing Leadership Act". 

20 (B) CONI<'ORMING AMENDMENT.-Section 

21 976(a)(1) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 

22 U.S.C. 16316(1)) is amended by striking "De23 partment of Energy High-End Computing Revi24 talization Act of 2004" and inserting "Amer25 ican Super Computing Leadership Act". 

g:\VHLC\0521 18\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
643 

G:\CMTEISC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

28 

(2) DEFINITIONS.-Seetion 2 of the Ameriean 

2 Super Computing Leadership Aet (15 U.S.C. 5541), 

3 as renamed by paragraph (1), is amended4 (A) by redesignating paragraphs (2) 

5 through (5) as paragraphs (3) through (6), re6 speetively; 

7 (B) by striking paragraph (1) and insert8 ing the following: 

9 "(1) DEPARTMENT.-The term 'Department' 

10 means the Department of Energy. 

11 "(2) EXABCALE COJVIPUTING.-The term 

12 'exaseale eomputing' means eompnting· through the 

13 use of a eomputing maehine that performs near or 

14 above 10 to the 18th power operations per seeond."; 

15 and 

16 (C) in paragraph (6) (as redesignated by 

17 subparagraph (A)), by striking ", aeting 

18 through the Direetor of the Offiee of Science of 

19 the Department of Energy". 

20 (3) DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY HIGH-END COM21 PUTING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.-

22 Section 3 of the American Super Computing Leader23 ship Aet (15 U.S.C. 5542), as renamed by para24 graph (1), is amendedg:\VHLCI052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21. 2018 (5:17 p.m.) 

(692785113) 
644 

G:\CMTE\S015\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

29 

1 (A) in subsection (a)(l), by striking "pro2 gram" and inserting "coordinated program 

3 across the Department"; 

4 (B) in subsection (b)(2), by striking ", 

5 which may" and all that follows through 

6 "multithreading architectures"; and 

7 (C) by striking subseetion (d) and insertS ing the following: 

9 "(d) EXASCAI,E COMPUTING PROGRA.cW.-

10 "(1) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary shall con11 duct a research program (referred to in this sub12 section as the 'Program') for exascale computing, in13 eluding the development of two or more exascale 

14 computing machine architectures, to promote the 

15 missions of the Department. 

16 "(2) E:A'ECUTION.-

17 "(A) IN GENERAL.-ln carrying out the 

18 Program, the Seeretary shall19 "(i) establish a National Laboratory 

20 partnership for industry partners and in21 stitutions of higher education for codesig11 

22 of exascale hardware, technology, software, 

23 and applications across all applicable orga24 nizations of the Department; 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
645 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17 p.m.) 

30 

"(ii) aequire multiple exascale computing systems at the existing Departmental facilities that represent at least two 

distinct technology options developed under 

elause (i); 

"(iii) develop such advancements in 

hardware and software technology as are 

required to fully realize the potential of an 

exascale production system in addressing 

Department target applications and solving 

scientific problems involving predictive 

modeling and simulation, large scale data 

analytics and management, and artificial 

intelligence; 

"(iv) explore the use of exaseale computing technologies to advance a broad 

range of science and engineering; and 

"(v) provide, as appropriate, on a 

competitive, merit-reviewed basis, access 

for researchers in industries in the United 

States, institutions of higher education, 

National Laboratories, and other Federal 

agencies to the exascale computing systems 

developed pursuant to clause (i). 

(692785113) 
646 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

31 

"(B) SEIJECTION m' PARTNERS.-The Sec2 retary shall select the partnerships with the 

3 computing facilities of the Department under 

4 subparagraph (A) through a competitive, peer5 review process. 

6 "(3) CODESTGN AND APPIJICATION DEVELOP7 ME;\JT.-

8 "(A) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary shall9 "(i) carry out the Program through 

10 an integration of applications, computer 

11 science, applied mathematics, and com12 puter hardware architecture using the 

13 partnerships established pursuant to para14 graph (2) to ensure that, to the maximum 

15 extent practicable, two or more exascale 

16 computing machine architectures are capa17 ble of solving Department target applica18 tions and broader scientific problems, in19 eluding predietive modeling and simulation, 

20 large seale data analytics and manage21 ment, and artifieial intelligenee; and 

22 "(ii) conduct outreaeh programs to in23 erease the readiness for the use of sueh 

24 platforms by domestie industries, including 

25 manufacturers. 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17 p.m.) 

(692785113) 
647 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

32 

"(B) REPORT.-(i) The Secretary shall 

submit to Congress a report describing how the 

integration under subparagraph (A) is furthering application science data and computational workloads across application interests, ineluding national seeurity, material science, 

physical science, cybersecurity, biologieal 

science, the Materials Genome and BRAIN Initiatives of the President, advanced manufacturing, and the national electric grid. 

"(ii) The roles and responsibilities of National Laboratories and industry, including the 

definition of the roles and responsibilities within 

the Department to ensure an integrated program across the Department. 

"(4) PROJECT RE\!EW.-

"(A) IN GENERAL.-The exascale architectures developed pursuant to partnerships established pursuant to paragraph (2) shall be reviewed through a project review process. 

"(B) REPORT.-Not later than 90 days 

after the date of enactment of this subsection, 

the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report 

on-

(692785113) 
648 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_20 18_00l.XML 

33 

"(i) the results of the reVIew con2 ducted under subparagraph (A); and 

3 "(ii) the coordination and manage4 mont of the Program to ensure an inte5 grated research program across the De6 partment. 

7 "(5) ANNUAJ, REPOHTS.-At the time of the 

8 budget submission of the Department for each fiscal 

9 year, the Secretary, in consultation with the mem1 0 bers of the partnerships established pursuant to 

11 paragraph (2), shall submit to Congress a report 

12 that describes funding for the Program as a whole 

13 by functional element of the Department and critical 

14 milestones.". 

15 (c) HIGH-PERFORMA."'CI<J COMPUTING A."!D NET16 WORKING RESI<JARCH.-The Director shall support re17 search in high-performance computing and networking rel18 evant to energy applications, including modeling, simula19 tion, machine learning, and advanced data analytics for 

20 basic and applied energy research programs carried out 

21 by the Secretary. 

22 (d) APPLIED .lVlATHEMATICS A."!D Sm'TWARE DJ<JVEL23 OPMEN'r FOR HIGH-I<JND COMPUTING SYSTEMS, COM24 PUTATIONAL, A."'D COMPUTER SCIENCES RESEARCH.-

g:\VHLC\05211 8\05211 8.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
649 

G:\CMTE\SC\ l5\SCIENCE\ISA_20 l8_00l.XML 

34 

1 (1) IN GENERAh-The Director shall carry out 

2 activities to develop, test, and support3 (A) mathematics, models, statistics, and a!-

4 gorithms for complex systems and programming 

5 environments; and 

6 (B) tools, languages, and operations for 

7 high-end computing systems (as defined in sec8 tion 2 of the American Super Computing Lead9 ership Act (15 U.S.C. 5541), as renamed by 

10 this section). 

11 (2) PORTPOLIO BAI..ANCE.-The Director shall 

12 maintain a balanced portfolio within the advanced 

13 scientific computing research and development pro14 gram established under section 976 of the Energy 

15 Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16316) that supports 

16 robust investment in applied mathematical, com17 putational, and computer sciences research while ac18 commodating· necessary investments in high-perform19 ance computing hardware and facilities. 

20 (e) WORKF'ORCE DEVEJ;OPMENT.-The Director of 

21 the Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research 

22 shall support the development of a computational science 

23 workforce through a program thatg:IVHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
650 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

35 

(1) facilitates collaboration between university 

2 students and researchers at the National Labora3 tories; and 

4 (2) endeavors to advance science m areas rel5 evant to the mission of the Department through the 

6 application of computational science. 

7 SEC. 6. HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS. 

8 (a) PROGRAJ.VI.-The Director shall carry out a re9 search program on the fundamental constituents of matter 

10 and energy and the nature of space and time. 

11 (b) MISSION.-The mission of the program described 

12 in subsection (a) shall be to support theoretical and experi13 mental research in both elementary partiele physics and 

14 fundamental accelerator science and technology to under15 stand fundamental properties of the universe. 

16 (c) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-It is the sense of the Con17 gress that18 (1) the Director should incorporate the finding·s 

19 and reconunendations of the Particle Physics Project 

20 Prioritization Panel's report entitled "Building for 

21 Discovery: Strategic Plan for U.S. Particle Physics 

22 in the Global Context", into the Department's plan23 ning process as part of the program described in 

24 subsection (a); 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
651 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

36 

(2) the Director should prioritize domestically 

2 hosted research projects that will maintain the 

3 United States position as a global leader in particle 

4 physics and attract the world's most talented physi5 cists and foreign investment for international col6 laboratiou; and 

7 (3) the nations that lead in particle physics by 

8 hosting international teams dedicated to a common 

9 scientific goal attract the world's best talent and in10 spire future generations of physicists and tech11 nologists. 

12 (d) NEUTRINO RESEARCH.-As part of the program 

13 described in subsection (a), the Director shall carry out 

14 research activities on rare decay processes and the nature 

15 of the neutrino, which may include collaborations with the 

16 National Science Poundation or international collabora17 tions. 

18 (e) LONG-BASELINE NEUTRINO l<'ACILITY FOR DEEP 

19 UNDERGROUND NEUTRINO EXPERIMENT.-

20 (1) IN GENERA.L.-The Secretary shall provide 

21 for a I~ong-Baseline Neutrino Pacility to facilitate 

22 the international Deep Underground Neutrino Ex23 periment to enable a program in neutrino physics to 

24 measure the fundamental properties of neutrinos, exg:\VHLC\052118\05211B.409.xml 

May 21.2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
652 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

37 

plore physics beyond the Standard Model, and better 

2 clarify the nature of matter and antimatter. 

3 (2) .B~ACILITY CAPABILITIES.-The Secretary 

4 shall ensure that the facility described in paragraph 

5 (1) will provide, at a minimum, the follo'i\ing capa6 bilities: 

7 (A) A broad-band neutrino beam capable 

8 of 1.2 megawatts (lVIW) of beam power and 

9 upgradable to 2.4 lV1\V of beam power. 

10 (B) Four caverns excavated for a forty kil11 oton fiducial detector mass and supporting sur12 face buildings and utilities. 

13 (C) Neutrino detector facilities at both the 

14 Far Site in South Dakota and the Near Site in 

15 Illinois to categorize and study neutrinos on 

16 their 800-mile journey between the two sites. 

17 (D) Cryogenic systems to support neutrino 

18 detectors. 

19 (3) S'l'AR'r Ol<' OPERATIONS.-The Secretary 

20 shall, to the maximum extent practicable, ensure 

21 that the start of full operations of the facility under 

22 this subsection occurs before December 31, 2026. 

23 ( 4) !l~UNDING.-Out of funds authorized to be 

24 appropriated under section 11 for High Energy 

25 Physics, there shall be made available to the Secg:IVHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21. 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
653 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

38 

retary to carry out activities, including construction 

2 of the facility, under this subsection3 (A) $95,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; and 

4 (B) $175,000,000 for fiscal year 2019. 

5 (5) DARK E~ERGY AND DARK MATTER RE6 SEARCH.-As part of the program described in para7 graph (1 ), the Director shall earry out researeh ae8 tivities on the nature of dark energy and dark mat9 ter, which may include collaborations ·with the Na1 0 tional Aeronautics and Space Administration or the 

11 National Science I<~oundation, or international col12 laboratious. 

13 (6) l~'l'ERNATIONAJ, COU.ABORATION.-The 

14 Director, as practicable and in coordination with 

15 other appropriate Federal agencies as necessary, 

16 shall ensure the access of United States researchers 

17 to the most advanced aceelerator facilities and re18 seareh eapahilities in the world, inelnding the IJarge 

19 Hadron Collider. 

20 SEC. 7. BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH. 

21 (a) PROGRAl\L-The Director shall carry out a pro22 gram of basic research in the areas of biological systems 

23 science and environmental science relevant to the develop24 ment of new energy teehnologies and to support Departg:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.} 

(692785113} 
654 

G:ICMTEISC\15\SC1ENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

39 

ment missions in energy, euvironment, and national secu2 rity. 

3 (b) BIOLOGICAL SYS'rBMS.-The Director shall carry 

4 out research and development activities in fundamental, 

5 structural, computational, and systems biology to increase 

6 systems-level understanding of the complex biological sys7 terns, which may include activities8 (1) to accelerate breakthroughs and new knowl9 edge that would enable the cost-effective, sustainable 

10 production of11 (A) biomass-based liquid transportation 

12 fuels; 

13 (B) bioenergy; and 

14 (C) biobased materials; 

15 (2) to improve understanding of the global car16 bon cycle, including processes for removing carbon 

17 dioxide from the atmosphere, through photosynthesis 

18 and other biological processes, for sequestration and 

19 storage; and 

20 (3) to understand the biological mechanisms 

21 used to transform, immobilize, or remove contami22 nants from subsurface environments. 

23 (c) BIOE~ERGY RESEARCH CI<JNTERS.-

24 (1) IN GENERAL.-In carrying out activities 

25 under subsection (a), the Director shall select and 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
655 

G:\CMTE\Sat5\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

40 

establish up to 4 bioenergy research centers to con2 duct basic and fundamental research in plant and 

3 microbial systems biology, bio imaging and analysis, 

4 and genomics to inform the production of fuels, 

5 chemicals from sustainable biomass resources, and 

6 to facilitate the translation of basic research results 

7 to industry. 

8 (2) SELECTION.-The Director shall select cen9 ters under paragraph (1) on a competitive, merit-re1 0 viewed basis. The Director shall consider applica11 tions from Xational Laboratories, multi-institutional 

12 collaborations, and other appropriate entities. 

13 (3) DUH.ATION.-A center established under 

14 this subsection shall receive support for a period of 

15 not more than 5 years, subject to the availability of 

16 appropriations. 

17 (4) EXISTING CENTERS.-'l'he Director may se1 8 lect a center for participation under this subsection 

19 that is in existence, or undergoing a renewal process, 

20 on the date of enactment of this Act. Such center 

21 shall be eligible to receive support for the duration 

22 the 5-year period beginning· on the date of establish23 ment of such center. 

24 (5) RENEW.AL.-Upon the expiration of any pe25 riod of support of a center under this subsection, the 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17 p.m.) 

(692785113) 
656 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

41 

1 Director may renew support for the center, on a 

2 merit-reviewed basis, for a period of not more than 

3 5 years. 

4 (6) TERMINATION.-Consistent with the exist5 ing· authorities of the Department, the Director may 

6 terminate an underperforming center for eanse dur7 ing the performance period. 

8 (d) Low DOSE RADIATION RESEARCH PROGRAt"\i.-

9 (1) IN GENERAL.-Subtitle G of title IX of the 

10 Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16311 et 

11 seq.) is amended by inserting after section 977 the 

12 following new section: 

13 "SEC. 977A. LOW-DOSE RADIATION RESEARCH PROGRAM. 

14 "(a) IN GENER.AL.-The Secretary shall carry out a 

15 basic research program on low-dose radiation to16 "(1) enhance the scientific understanding of, 

17 and reduce uncertainties associated with, the effects 

18 of e}.-posure to low-dose radiation; and 

19 "(2) inform improved risk-assessment and risk20 management methods with respect to such radiation. 

21 "(b) PROGR.Iu\'I COMPONENTS.-In carrying out the 

22 program required under subsection (a), the Secretary 

23 shall24 "(1) formulate scientific goals for low-dose radi25 ation basic research in the United States; 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
657 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

42 

1 "(2) identity ongomg scientific challenges for 

2 understanding the long-term effects of ionizing radi3 ation on biological systems; 

4 "(3) develop a long-term strategic and 

5 prioritized basic research agenda to address such 

6 scientific challenges in coordination with other re7 search efforts; 

8 "(4) leverage the collective body of knowledge 

9 from existing low-dose radiation research; and 

10 "(5) engage with other Federal agencies, re11 search communities, and potential users of informa12 tion produced under this section, including institu13 tions concerning radiation research, medical physics, 

14 radiology, health physics, and emergency response. 

15 "(c) COORDINATION.-In carrying out the program, 

16 the Secretary, in coordination with the Physical Science 

17 Subcommittee of the National Science and Technology 

18 Council, shall19 " ( 1) support the directives under section 106 of 

20 the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act 

21 (42 U.S.C. 6601 note); 

22 "(2) ensure that the Office of Science of the 

23 Department of Energy consults with the National 

24 Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National 

25 Institutes of Health, the Environmental Protection 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
658 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

1 Agency, the Department of Defense, the Nuclear 

2 Regulatory Commission, and the Department of 

3 Homeland Security; 

4 "(3) advise and assist the National Science and 

5 Technology Council on policies and initiatives in ra6 diation biology, including enhancing scientific knowl7 edge of the effects of low-dose radiation on biological 

8 systems to improve radiation risk-assessment and 

9 risk-management methods; and 

10 "(4) identifY opportunities to stimulate inter11 national cooperation relating to low-dose radiation 

12 and leverage research and knowledg·e from sources 

13 outside of the United States. 

14 "(d) RESEARCH PLAc"<'.-Not later than 180 days 

15 after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 

16 transmit to the Committee on Science, Space, and Tech17 no logy of the House of Representatives and the Committee 

18 on Energy and Natural Resources of the Sl~nate a 4-year 

19 research plan that identifies and prioritizes basic research 

20 needs relating to low-dose radiation. In developing such 

21 plan, the Secretary shall incorporate the components de22 scribed in subsection (b). 

23 "(e) DEFINITION OF LOW-DOSE RilliATION.-ln this 

24 section, the term 'low-dose radiation' means a radiation 

25 dose of less than 100 millisieverts. 

g:\VHLC\0521 18\05211 8.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.} 

(692785113} 
659 

G:\CMTE\S0!5\SC!ENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

44 

1 "(f) RUJ,E OF CONSTRUCTION.-Nothing in this sec2 tion shall be construed to subject any research carried out 

3 by the Secretary for the program under this section to 

4 any limitations described in 977(e) of the Energy Policy 

5 Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16317(e)). 

6 "(g) FUNDING.-From within funds authorized to be 

7 appropriated under section 11 of the Department of En8 ergy Science and Innovation Act of 2018, for Biological 

9 and Environmental Research, the Secretary make avail10 able to carry out this section11 "(1) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; and 

12 "(2) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2019.". 

13 (2) CONI<'ORl\IING Al\IENDl\LENT.-The table of 

14 contents for subtitle G of title IX of the Energy PollS icy Act of 2005 is amended by inserting after the 

16 item relating to section 977 the following: 

"977A. Low-dose radiation research program.". 

17 (e) LIMITATION FOR RESEARCH "B'UNDS.-The Direc18 tor shall not approve new climate science-related initia19 tives without making a determination that such work is 

20 well-coordinated with any relevant work carried out by 

21 other Federal agencies. 

22 SEC. 8. FUSION ENERGY. 

23 (a) PROGRAlVr.-The Director shall carry out a fusion 

24 energy sciences research program to expand the under25 standing of plasmas and matter at very high temperatures 

g:\VHLC\05211 B\05211 8.409.xml 

May 21, 201 B (5:17 p.m.) 

(692785113) 
660 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

45 

and densities and build the science and engineering foun2 dation needed to develop a fusion energy source. 

3 (b) INERTIAio FUSION ENERGY RESEARCH k'<'D DE4 VEioOPMBNT PROGRAM.-The Secretary shall carry out a 

5 program of research and technology development in iner6 tial fusion for energy applications, including ion beam, 

7 laser, and pulsed power fusion systems. 

8 (c) TOKAl\iAK RESEARCH A.ND DEVELOPMENT.-

9 (1) IN GENERAL.-The Director shall support 

10 research and development activities and facility oper11 ations to optimize the tokamak approach to fusion 

12 energy. 

13 (2) INTERNATIONAl, THERMONUCLEAR EXPERI14 MENT.AL RBAC'l'OR CONSTRUCTION.-Section 972 of 

15 the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16312) 

16 is amended by adding section the following new 

17 paraf,>Taph: 

18 "(6) ITER CONSTRUCTION.-

19 "(A) IN GENERAL.-There IS authorized 

20 United States participation in the construction 

21 and operations of the ITER project, as agreed 

22 to under the April 25, 2007 'Agreement on the 

23 Establishment of the ITER International Fu24 sion Energy Organization for the Joint Imple25 mentation of the ITER Project.'. 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17 p.m.) 

(692785113) 
661 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_20!8_00l.XML 

46 

"(B) FACIIJITY REQUIRK~lEN'l'S.-The Sec2 retary shall ensure that the mission-oriented 

3 user facility will enable the study of a burning 

4 plasma, and shall be built to have the follo"\\ring 

5 characteristics in its full configuration: 

6 "(i) A tokamak device v\rith a plasma 

7 radius of 6.2 meters and a magnetic field 

8 of 5.3 T. 

9 "(ii) Capable of creating and sus10 taining a 15-million-Ampcre plasma cur11 rent for greater than 300 seconds. 

12 "(c) Al:THORIZATION OF APPROPRUTIONS.-From 

13 "'rithin funds authorized to be appropriated under section 

14 11 of the Department of J<Jnergy Science and Innovation 

15 Act of 2018, for Fusion l<Jnergy Sciences, there is author16 ized for in-kind contributions under this section17 "(1) $122,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; and 

18 "(2) $163,000,000 for fiseal year 2019. 

19 "(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRLtTIONS.-From 

20 within funds authorized to be appropriated under section 

21 11 of the Department of J<Jnergy Science and Innovation 

22 Act of 2018, for Fusion Energy Sciences, there is author23 ized for cash contributions under this section24 

25 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

"(1) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2018; and 

"(2) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2019.". 

(692785113) 
662 

G:\CMTE\SC\ l5\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

47 

(d) lNERTIAij FUSION ENI<JRGY RESI<JARCH AND DE2 VELOPl'IIENT.-The Director shall support research and 

3 development activities for inertial fusion for energy appli4 cations. 

5 (e) AWERNATIVE At'-'D ENABLING CONCEPTS.-

6 (1) IN GENERAL.-As part of the program de7 scribed in subsection (a), the Director shall support 

8 research and development activities and facility oper9 ations at United States universities, national labora10 tories, and private facilities for a portfolio of alter11 native and enabling fusion energy concepts that may 

12 prm,ide solutions to significant challenges to the es13 tablishment of a commercial magnetic fusion power 

14 plant, prioritized based on the ability of the United 

15 States to play a leadership role in the international 

16 fusion research community. Fusion energy concepts 

17 and activities explored under this paragraph may in18 elude19 (A) high magnetic field approaches facili20 tated by high temperature superconductors; 

21 (B) advanced stellarator concepts; 

22 (C) non-tokamak confinement configura23 tions operating at low magnetic fields; 

24 (D) magnetized target fusion energy con25 cepts; 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
663 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_20 18_00 l.XML 

48 

(E) liquid metals to address issues assom2 ated with fusion plasma interactions with the 

3 inner wall of the encasing device; 

4 (F) immersion blankets for heat manageS ment and fuel breeding; 

6 (G) advanced scientific computing activi7 ties; and 

8 (H) other promising fusion energy con9 cepts identified by the Director. 

10 (2) COORDINATION WITH ARPA-E.-The Under 

11 Secretary and the Director shall coordinate with the 

12 Director of the AdYaneed Research Projects Agency13 Energy (in this paragraph referred to as "ARPA14 E") to15 (A) assess the potential for any fusion en16 ergy project supported by ARPA-E to rep17 resent a promising approach to a commercially 

18 viable fusion power plant; 

19 (B) determine whether the results of any 

20 fusion energy project supported by ARPA-E 

21 merit the support of follow-on research activi22 ties carried out by the Office of Science; and 

23 (C) avoid unintentional duplication of ac24 tivities. 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 201 B (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
664 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_20l8_00l.XML 

49 

1 (f) COORDINATION WITH ARPA-E.-The Director 

2 shall coorclinate with the Director of the Advanced Re3 search Projects Agency-Energy (referred to in this sub4 section as "Al{PA-E") to--

5 ( 1) assess the potential for any fusion energy 

6 project supported by AHPA-E to represent a prom7 ising approach to a commercially viable fusion power 

8 plant; 

9 (2) determine whether the results of any fusion 

10 energy project supported by ARPA-E merit the sup11 port of follow-on research activities carried out by 

12 the Office of Science; and 

13 (3) avoid the unintentional duplication of activi14 ties. 

15 (g) FAIRNESS IN COMPETITION !<'OR SOLICITATIONS 

16 FOR INTERNATIONAL PRO,JECT ACTIVITIES.-Scction 33 

17 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 ( 42 U.S.C. 2053) is 

18 amended by inserting before the first sentence the fol19 lowing: "In this section, with respect to international re20 search projects, the term 'private facilities or laboratories' 

21 means facilities or laboratories located in the United 

22 States.". 

23 (h) lDENTU'ICATION OF PRIORITIES.-

24 (1) REPORT.-

g:IVHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21, 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
665 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21. 2018 (5:17p.m.) 

50 

(A) IN GBNBRAh-Not later than 2 years 

after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the 

fusion energy research and development activities that the Department proposes to carry out 

over the 10-year period following the date of 

the report under not fewer than 3 realistic 

budget scenarios, including a scenario based on 

3-percent annual grmvth in the non-ITER portion of the budget for fusion enerf,ry research 

and development activities. 

(B) lNCLUSIONS.-The report required 

under subparagraph (A) shall-

(i) identify specific areas of fusion energy research and enabling technology development, including activ--ities to advance 

inertial and alternative fusion energy concepts, in whieh the United States can and 

should establish or solidify a lead in the 

global fusion energy development effort; 

(ii) identify priorities for initiation of 

facility constmetion and faeility decommissioning under each of the three budget seenarios described in subparagraph (A); and 

(692785113) 
666 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

51 

(iii) assess the ability of the fusion 

2 workforce of the United States to carry out 

3 the activities identified under clauses (i) 

4 and (ii), including the adequacy of proS grams at institutions of higher education 

6 in the United States to train the leaders 

7 and workers of the next generation of fu8 sion energy researchers. 

9 (2) PROCESS.-ln order to develop the report 

10 required under paragTaph (l)(A), the Secretary shall 

11 leverage best practices and lessons learned from the 

12 process used to develop the most recent report of the 

13 Particle Physics Project Prioritization Panel of the 

14 High Energy Physics Advisory Panel. 

15 (3) REQUIREMENT.-No member of the :B'usion 

16 Energy Sciences Advisory Committee shall be ex17 eluded from participating in developing or voting on 

18 final approval of the report required under para19 graph (l)(A). 

20 SEC. 9. NUCLEAR PHYSICS. 

21 (a) PROGRAM.-The Director shall carry out a pro22 gram of experimental and theoretical research, and sup23 port associated facilities, to discover, explore, and under24 stand all forms of unclear matter. 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
667 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

52 

(b) ISOTOPE DEVEI,OPl\IEl\'T AND PRODUCTION I<'OR 

2 RESEARCH APPLICATIONS.-The Director3 (1) may carry out a program for the production 

4 of isotopes, including the development of techniques 

5 to produce isotopes, that the Secretary determines 

6 are needed for researeh, medieal, industrial, or re7 lated purposes; and 

8 (2) shall ensure that isotope production activi9 ties carried out under the program under this para10 gTaph do not compete vv:ith private industry unless 

11 the Director determines that critieal national inter12 ests require the involvement of the Federal Govern13 ment. 

14 (c) RENAMING OF THE RARE ISOTOPE ACCEL15 ERATOR.-Section 981 of the Energy Poliey Act of 2005 

16 (42 U.S.C. 16321) is amended17 (1) in the section heading, by striking "RARE 

18 ISOTOPE ACCELERATOR" and inserting "FACIL· 

19 ITY FOR RARE ISOTOPE BEAMS"; and 

20 (2) by striking "Rare Isotope Accelerator" each 

21 place it appears and inserting "l<~acility for Rare lso22 tope Beams". 

23 (d) FACILITY I<'OR RAm:: ISOTOPE BEAMS.-

24 (1) IN GEl\'ERAL.-The Secretary shall provide 

25 for a Facility for Rare Isotope Beams to advance the 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
668 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_20 18_00 l.XML 

53 

understanding of rare nuclear isotopes and the evo2 lution of the cosmos. 

3 (2) l''ACILITY CAPABILITY.-ln carrying out 

4 paragraph (1), the Secretary shall provide for, at a 

5 minimum, a rare isotope beam facility capable of 

6 400 kW of beam power. 

7 (3) START OF OPERATIONS.-The Secretary 

8 shall, to the maximum extent practicable, ensure 

9 that the start of full operations of the facility under 

10 this subsection occurs before June 30, 2022, with 

11 early operation in 2018. 

12 (4) FU!\TDING.-Out of funds authorized to be 

13 appropriated under section 11 for Nuclear Physics, 

14 there shall be made available to the Secretary to 

15 carry out activities, including construction of the fa16 cility, under this subsection17 (A) $101,200,000 for fiscal year 2018; and 

18 (B) $86,000,000 for fiscal year 2019. 

19 SEC. 10. SCIENCE LABORATORIES INFRASTRUCTURE PRO20 GRAM. 

21 (a) IN GENERAL.-The Director shall carry out a 

22 program to improve the safety, efficiency, and mission 

23 readiness of infrastructure at Office of Science labora24 tories. The program shall include projects tog:IVHLC10521181052118.409.xml 

May 21.2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
669 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\1SA_2018_00l.XML 

54 

(1) renovate or replace space that does not 

2 meet research needs; 

3 (2) replace facilities that arc no longer cost ef4 fective to renovate or operate; 

5 (3) modernize utility systems to prevent failures 

6 and ensure efficiency; 

7 ( 4) remove excess facilities to allow safe and ef8 ficient operations; and 

9 (5) construct modern facilities to conduct ad10 vanced research in controlled environmental condi11 tions. 

12 (b) APPROACH.-In carrying out this section, the Di13 rector shall utilize all available approaches and mecha14 nisms, including capital line items, minor construction 

15 projects, energy savings performance contracts, utility en16 ergy service contracts, alternative financing, and expense 

17 funding, as appropriate. 

18 SEC. 11. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

19 (a) FISCAl; YEAR 2018.-There are authorized to be 

20 appropriated to the Secretary for the Office of Science for 

21 fiscal year 2018 $6,259,903,000, ofwhich22 (1) $2,090,000,000 shall be for Basic Energy 

23 Science; 

24 (2) $908,000,000 shall be for High Energy 

25 Physics; 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21. 2018 (5:17 p.m.) 

(692785113) 
670 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_00l.XML 

55 

(3) $673,000,000 shall be for Biological and 

2 Environmental Research; 

3 ( 4) $684,000,000 shall be for Nuclear Physics; 

4 (5) $810,000,000 shall be for Advanced Sci5 entific Computing Research; 

6 (6) $532,111,000 shall be for Fusion Energy 

7 Sciences; 

8 (7) $257,292,000 shall be for Science Labora9 tories Infrastructure; 

10 (8) $183,000,000 shall be for Science Program 

11 Direction; 

12 (9) $103,000,000 shall be for Safeguards and 

13 Security; and 

14 (10) $19,500,000 shall be for ·workforce Devel15 opment for Teachers and Scientists. 

16 (b) I-i'ISCAL YEAR 2019.-There are authorized to be 

17 appropriated to the Secretary for the Office of Science for 

18 fiscal year 2019 $6,600,000,000, ofwhich19 (1) $2,129,233,000 shall be for Basic Energy 

20 Science; 

21 (2) $1,004,510,000 shall be for High Energy 

22 Physics; 

23 (3) $673,000,000 shall be for Biological and 

24 Environmental Research; 

25 ( 4) $690,000,000 shall be for Nuclear Physics; 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
671 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\ISA_2018_001.XML 

56 

(5) $899,010,000 shall be for Advanced Sci2 entific Computing Research; 

3 (6) $640,000,000 shall be for Fusion Energy 

4 Sciences; 

5 (7) $257,292,000 shall be for Science Labora6 tories Infrastmctnre; 

7 (8) $181,345,000 shall be for Science Program 

8 Direction; 

9 (9) $106,110,000 shall be for Safeguards and 

10 Security; and 

11 (10) $19,500,000 shall be for Workforce Devel12 opment for Teachers and Scientists. 

g:\VHLC\052118\052118.409.xml 

May 21,2018 (5:17p.m.) 

(692785113) 
672 

G:IM\15\WEBER\WEBER_Ol9.XML 

AMENDMENT TO DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

SCIENCE AND INNOVATION ACT OF 2018 

OFFERED BY MR. WEBER OF TEXAS 

Page 44, line 17, insert the following new subseetion 

(and redesignate sueceeding subsections aceordingly): 

1 (e) MODELING RESEARCH.-As part of the activities 

2 described in subsection (a), the Director is authorized to 

3 carry out research to develop multiscale computational 

4 models that incorporate and examine interactions among 

5 human and earth systems. 

Page 4 7, strike lines 1 through 4 (and redesignate 

succeeding subsections accordingly). 

Page 49, strike lines 1 through 14 (and redesignate 

the succeeding subsection accordingly). 

g:\VHLC\05221 8\05221 8.322.xml 

May 22,2018 (5:19p.m.) 

(69685014) 
673 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\SIG_OOI.XML 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION 

(Original Signature of Member} 

H.R. 

To pro-vide directors of the N a tiona! Laboratories signature anthorit~· for 

certain agreements, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRI<JSENTATIVES 

Mr. HULTGREN introduced the following hill; which was referred to the 

Committee on 

A BILL 

To provide directors of the National Laboratories signature 

authority for certain agreements, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "National Innovation 

5 Modernization by Laboratory Empowerment Act" or the 

6 "NIMBLE Act". 

7 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

8 In this Act: 

g:\VHLC\051818\051818.185.xml 

May 18, 2018 (3:07p.m.) 

(69501215) 
674 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\SIG_OOI.XML 

2 

(1) DEPARTMENT.-The term "Department" 

2 means the Department of Energy. 

3 (2) NATIONAL LABORATORY.-The term "Na4 tiona! Laboratory" means a Department of Energy 

5 nonmilitary national laboratory, including·-

6 (A) Ames Laboratory; 

7 (B) Argonne X ational Laboratory; 

8 (C) Brookhaven National Laboratory; 

9 (D) Fermi National Accelerator Labora10 tory; 

11 (E) Idaho National Laboratory; 

12 (F) Lawrenee Berkeley National Labora13 tory; 

14 (G) National Energy Technology Labora15 tory; 

16 (H) National Renewable Energy Labora17 tory; 

18 (I) Oak Ridge National Laboratory; 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\051818\051818.185.xml 

May 18, 2018 (3:07 p.m.) 

tory; 

( J) Paeific Northwest N a tiona! I1abora-

(K) Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory; 

(I1) Savannah River National Laboratory; 

(M) Stanford Linear Accelerator Center; 

(N) Thomas ,Jefferson National Accelerator Facility; and 

(69501215) 
675 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\SIG_OOI.XML 

(0) any laboratory operated by the Na2 tiona! Nuclear Security Administration, but 

3 only \Vith respect to the civilian energy activities 

4 thereof. 

5 (3) SECRETARY.-The term "Secretary" means 

6 the Secretary of Energy. 

7 SEC. 3. PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS FOR COMMER8 CIALIZATION. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.-Subject to subsections (b) and (c), 

10 the Secretary shall delegate to directors of the National 

11 Laboratories signature authority with respect to any 

12 agreement described in subsection (b) the total cost of 

13 which (including the National Laboratory contributions 

14 and project recipient cost share) is less than $1,000,000, 

15 if sueh an agreement falls within the scope of16 (1) a strategic plan for the National Laboratory 

17 that has been approved by the Department; or 

18 (2) the most recent Congressionally approved 

19 budget for Department activities to be carried out by 

20 the National Laboratory. 

21 (b) AGREI~MENTS.-Subseetion (a) applies to22 (1) a cooperative research and development 

23 agreement; 

24 (2) a non-Federal work-for-others agreement; 

25 and 

g:\VHLC\051818\051818.185.xml 

May 18, 2018 (3:07p.m.) 

(69501215) 
676 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\SIG_OOl.XML 

4 

1 (3) any other agreement determined to be ap2 propriate by the Secretary, in collaboration with the 

3 directors of the National Laboratories. 

4 (c) ADMINISTRATION.-

5 (1) ACCOUNTABILITY.-The director of the af6 fected National Laboratory and the affected con7 tractor shall carry out an agreement under this sec8 tion in accordance ;vith applicable policies of the De9 partment, including by ensuring that the agreement 

10 does not compromise any national security, eco11 nomic, or environmental interest of the United 

12 States. 

13 (2) CERTIFICATION.-The director of the af14 fected National Laboratory and the affected con15 tractor shall certify that each activity carried out 

16 under a project for which an agreement is entered 

17 into under this section does not present, or mini18 mizes, any apparent conflict of interest, and avoids 

19 or neutralizes any actual conflict of interest, as a re20 sult of the agreement under this section. 

21 (3) AVAII..ABILITY OF RECORDS.-Within 30 

22 days of entering an agreement under this section, 

23 the director of a National Laboratory shall submit 

24 to the Secretary for monitoring and review all 

g:\VHLC\051 81 B\051 81 B. 185.xml 

May 16, 2018 (3:07p.m.) 

(69501215) 
677 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\SIG_OOl.XML 

5 

records of the National Laboratory relating to the 

2 agreement. 

3 ( 4) RATES.-The director of a National Lab4 oratory may charge higher rates for services per5 formed under a partnership agreement entered into 

6 pursuant to this section, regardless of the full cost 

7 of recovery, if such funds are used exclusively to 

8 support further research and development activities 

9 at the respective National Laboratory. 

10 (d) EXCEPTION.-This section docs not apply to any 

11 agTeement with a majority foreign-owned company. 

12 (e) CONFORMING AME:"DMENT.-Section 12 of the 

13 Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 

14 U.S.C. 3710a) is amendedIS (1) in subsection (a)-

16 (A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and 

17 (2) as subparagraphs (A) and (B), respectively, 

18 and indenting the subparagraphs appropriately; 

19 (B) by striking "Each Federal agency" 

20 and inserting the following: 

21 "(1) IN GENEitAI,.-Except as provided in para22 gTaph (2), each l<~cderal agency"; and 

23 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

24 "(2) ExcEPTION.-Notwithstanding paragraph 

25 (1), in accordance with section 3(a) of the NIMBLE 

g:\VHLC\051818\051818.185.xml 

May 18, 2018 (3:07p.m.) 

(69501215) 
678 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\SIG_OOl.XML 

6 

1 Act, approval by the Secretary of Energy shall not 

2 be required for any technology transfer agreement 

3 proposed to be entered into by a National Labora4 tory of the Department of Energy, the total cost of 

5 which (including the National Laboratory contribu6 tions and project recipient cost share) is less than 

7 $1,000,000."; and 

8 (2) in subsection (b), by striking "subsection 

9 (a)(l)" each place it appears and inserting "sub10 section (a)(l)(A)". 

11 SEC. 4. SAVINGS CLAUSE. 

12 Nothing in this Act or an amendment made by this 

13 Act abrogates or otherwise affects the primary responsibil14 ities of any National Laboratory to the Department. 

g:\VHLC\051 818\051818.1 85.xml 

May 18, 2018 {3:07p.m.) 

(69501215) 
679 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\ENERGY\ARPAE_002.XML 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H.R. 

(Original Signature of l\'Iemher) 

'ro amend the America COMPETES Act to establish Department of Energy 

policy for Advanced Research Projects Agency-I<Jnergy, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTA'l'IVES 

Mr. LUCAS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on __________________ __ 

A BILL 

To amend the America COMPETES Act to establish Department of Energy policy for Advanced Research Projects 

Agency-Energy, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION I. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "ARPA-E Act of 2018". 

5 SEC. 2. ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY-EN6 ERGY. 

7 (a) ESTABLISHMI<JNT.-Section 5012(b) of the Amer8 ICa COMPETES Act (42 U.S.C. 16538(b)) is amended 

g:IVHLC\051818\051818.193.xml 

May 18,2018 (3:16p.m.) 

(692786111) 
680 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\ENERGY\ARPAE_002.XML 

2 

by striking "development of energy technologies" and in2 serting "development of transformative science and tech3 nology solutions to address energy, environmental, eco4 nomic, and national security challenges". 

5 (b) GoALs.-Section 5012(c) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 

6 16538(c)) is amended7 (1) by striking paragraph ( 1 )(A) and inserting 

8 the following: 

9 "(A) to enhance the economic and energy 

10 security of the United States through the devel11 opment of energy technologies that12 "(i) reduce imports of energy from 

13 foreign sources; 

14 "(ii) reduce energy-related emissions, 

15 including greenhouse gases; 

16 "(iii) improve the energy efficiency of 

17 all economic sectors; 

18 "(iv) provide transformative solutions 

19 to improve the management, clean-up, and 

20 disposal of21 "(I) low-level radioactive waste; 

22 "(II) spent nuclear fuel; and 

23 

24 

g:\VHLC\051818\051818.193.xml 

May 18,2018 (3:16p.m.) 

(692786111) 

"(III) high-level radioactive 

waste; 
681 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\ENERGY\ARPAE_002.XML 

3 

"(v) improve efficiency and reduce the 

2 environmental impact of all forms of en3 ergy production; 

4 "(vi) improve the resiliency, reliability, 

5 and security of the electric grid; and 

6 "(vii) address other challenges ·within 

7 the mission of the Department as deter8 mined by the Secretary; and"; and 

9 (2) in paragraph (2) by striking "energy tech10 nology projects" and inserting· "advanced technology 

11 projects". 

12 (c) RESPONSIBILITIES.-Seetion 5012(e)(a)(A) of 

13 sueh Aet (42 U.S.C. 16538(e)(3)(A)) is amended by strik14 ing "energy". 

15 (d) STHATEGIC VISION ROADlllAP .-Seetion 

16 5012(h)(2) of sueh Act (42 U.S.C. 16538(h)(2)) is 

17 amended to read as follows: 

18 "(2) STRATEGIC VISION ROADl\iAP.-ln the re19 port n~quired under paragraph (1), the Director 

20 shall include a roadmap describing the strategic vi21 sion that ARPA-E will use to guide the choices of 

22 ARPA-E for future technology investments over the 

23 follo-wing 2 fiscal years.". 

g:\VHLC\051 8181051818.193.xml 

May 18, 2018 (3:16 p.m.) 

(692786111) 
682 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\ENERGY\ARPAE_002.XML 

4 

(e) COORDINATION A."iD NONDUPI,ICATION.-Section 

2 5012(i)(1) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 16538(i)(1)) is amend3 ed to read as follows: 

4 "(1) IN GENJ<JRi\L.-To the maXImum extent 

5 practicable, the Director shall ensure that6 "(A) the activities of ARPA-E are coonli7 nated with, and do not duplicate the efforts of, 

8 programs and laboratories within the Depart9 ment and other relevant research ageneies; and 

10 "(B) ARPA-E does not provide funding 

11 for a projeet unless the prospective grantee 

12 demonstrates13 "(i) sufficient attempts to secure pn14 vate financing; or 

15 "(ii) that the project is not independ16 ently commercially viable.". 

17 (f) EVALUATION.-Seetion 5012(1) of such Act ( 42 

18 U.S.C. 16538(1)) is amended19 ( 1) by striking paragraph ( 1) and inserting the 

20 following: 

21 "(1) IN GENERL\L.-Not later than 3 years 

22 after the date of enactment of the ARPA-E Act of 

23 2018, the Secretary may offer to enter into a eon24 tract with the N a tiona! Aeademy of Seiences under 

25 which the National Academy shall conduct an evalg:\VHLC\051 B 1 B\051 B 1 B.193.xml 

May 18, 2018 (3:16p.m.) 

(692786111) 
683 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\ENERGY\ARPAE_002.XML 

5 

1 uation of how well ARPA-E Is achieving the goals 

2 and mission of ARPA-E."; and 

3 (2) in paragraph (2)-

4 (A) by striking "shall" and inserting 

5 "may"; and 

6 (B) by striking "the recommendation of 

7 the National Academy of Seienees" and insert8 ing "a recommendation". 

9 (g) PROTE:CTION OF PROPRIETARY INFORJVI.\TION.-

10 Section 5012 of such Act ( 42 U.S.C. 16538) is amended11 (1) by redesignating· subsection (n) as sub12 section (o); and 

13 (2) by inserting after subsection (m) the fol14 lowing new subsection: 

15 "(n) PROTE:CTION OF PROPRIETARY INFOIUvL<\-

16 TION.-

17 "(1) IN GENE:RAL.-The following categories of 

18 information collected by ARPA-E from recipients of 

19 awards under this section shall be considered privi20 leged and confidential and not subject to disclosure 

21 pursuant to section 552 of title 5, United States 

22 Code: 

23 "(A) Plans for commercialization of tech24 nologies developed under the award, including 

25 

g:\VHLC\051818\051818.193.xml 

May 18,2018 (3:16p.m.) 

business plans, technology-to-market plans, 

(692786111) 
684 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\ENERGY\ARPAE_002.XML 

6 

market studies, and cost and performance mod2 els. 

3 "(B) Investments provided to an awardee 

4 from third parties (such as venture capital 

5 firms, hedge funds, and private equity firms), 

6 including amounts and the percentage of owner7 ship of the awardee provided in return for the 

8 investments. 

9 "(C) Additional financial support that the 

10 awardee--

11 "(i) plans to invest, or has invested, 

12 into the technology developed under the 

13 award; or 

14 "(ii) is seeking from third parties. 

15 "(D) Hevenue from the licensing or sale of 

16 new products or services resulting from re17 search conducted under the award. 

18 "(2) EFFEC'l' OF STTBSECTIOK.-Nothing in this 

19 subsection shall be construed to affect20 "(A) the authority of the Secretary to use 

21 information without publicly disclosing such in22 formation; or 

23 "(B) the responsibility of the Secretary to 

24 transmit information to Congress as required 

25 by law.". 

g:\VHLC\051818\051818.193.xml 

May 18, 2018 (3:16p.m.) 

(692786111) 
685 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\ENERGY\ARPAE_002.XML 

7 

(h) FUNDING.-Section 5012(o)(4) of such Act (42 

2 U.S.C. 16538(o)(4)), as redesignated by subsection (f)(l), 

3 is amended by striking "during the 5-year period begin4 ning on the date of enactment of this Act". 

5 (i) TECHNICAL A>IENDMENTS.-

6 (1) Section 5012(g)(3)(A)(iii) of such Act (42 

7 U.S.C. 16538(g)(3)(A)(iii)) is amended by striking 

8 "subpart" each place it appears and inserting "sub9 paragraph". 

10 (2) Section 5012(o)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 

11 16538(o)(2)), as redesignated by subsection (f)(l), 

12 is amended by striking "paragraphs (4) and (5)" 

13 and inserting "paragraph ( 4)". 

g:\VHLC\051818\051818.193.xml 

May 18,2018 (3:16p.m.) 

(692786111) 
686 

G:\M\15\LUCAS\LUCAS_OOS.XML 

AMENDMENT TO ARPA-E ACT OF 2018 

OFFERED BY MR. LUCAS OF OKLAHOMA 

Page 4, strike lines 10 through 16, and insert the 

following: 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

(B) ARPA-E does not provide funding for 

a projeet unless the prospeetive grantee demonstrates sufficient attempts to secure private 

financing or indicates that the project is not 

independently eommercially viable. 

Page 4, line 23 strike "may offer" and insert "is authorized". 

Page 5, line 5 strike "may" and insert "is authorized to". 

g:\VHLC\05221 B\052218.26B.xml 

May 22, 201 B (4:11 p.m.) 

(69686812) 
(687) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUPS: H.R. 6227, NATIONAL 

QUANTUM INITIATIVE ACT; 

H.R. 6229, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF 

STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY 

REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2018; AND 

H.R. 6226, AMERICAN SPACE 

SAFE MANAGEMENT ACT 

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 27, 2018 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:11 a.m., in room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of the Committee at any time. 

Pursuant to Committee rule 2(e) and House rule XI(2)(h)(4), the 

Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes. 

Today, we meet to consider H.R. 6227, the National Quantum 

Initiative Act; H.R. 6229, the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology Reauthorization Act of 2018; and H.R. 6226, the American Space SAFE Management Act. I’ll recognize myself for an 

opening statement. 

The first bill we consider, H.R. 6227, the National Quantum Initiative Act, supports a much more concentrated, coordinated Federal effort to accelerate quantum research and technology development for the economic and national security of the United States. 

Let me thank Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson and the 28 

other Members of the Committee for cosponsoring this bipartisan 

legislation. 

The second bill is H.R. 6229, the National Institute of Standards 

and Technology Reauthorization Act of 2018. This legislation, sponsored by Research and Technology Subcommittee Chairwoman Barbara Comstock, authorizes NIST’s research and technology programs for 2 years. The bill provides for increased fundamental scientific and technical research and investments in emerging technology areas. This will ensure continued U.S. innovation leadership 

in quantum science, artificial intelligence and big data science, 

cybersecurity, the Internet of Things and sustainable infrastruc-
688 

ture. Chairwoman Comstock’s bill also directs NIST to use its 

cybersecurity expertise to assist Federal agencies in improving critical infrastructure cybersecurity. 

The final bill is H.R. 6226, the American Space SAFE Management Act. This landmark legislation, cosponsored by Space Subcommittee Chairman Brian Babin, Ranking Member Ami Bera, and 

Congressman Ed Perlmutter, establishes a space traffic management framework that will ensure a safe operating environment in 

outer space. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

Today we meet to consider three bills. The first is H.R. 6227, the National Quantum Initiative Act. This legislation supports a much more concentrated, coordinated 

Federal effort to accelerate quantum research and technology development for the 

economic and national security of the United States. 

Let me thank Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson and the 28 other members 

of the committee for co-sponsoring this bipartisan legislation. The second bill is H.R. 

6229, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Reauthorization 

Act of 2018. This legislation, sponsored by Research and Technology Subcommittee 

Chairwoman Barbara Comstock, authorizes NIST’s research and technology programs for two years. 

The bill provides for increased fundamental scientific and technical research and 

investments in emerging technology areas. This will ensure continued U.S. innovation leadership in quantum science, artificial intelligence and big data science, 

cybersecurity, the internet of things and sustainable infrastructure. 

Chairwoman Comstock’s bill also directs NIST to use its cybersecurity expertise 

to assist federal agencies in improving critical infrastructure cybersecurity. The 

final bill is H.R. 6226, the American Space SAFE Management Act. This landmark 

legislation, co-sponsored by Space Subcommittee Chairman Brian Babin, Ranking 

Member Ami Bera and Congressman Ed Perlmutter, establishes a space traffic 

management framework that will ensure a safe operating environment in outer 

space. 

Chairman SMITH. I’ll recognize the Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from Texas, Eddie Bernice Johnson, for her opening statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Chairman Smith, for holding today’s markup of three bills. The first bill we are considering 

is the National Quantum Initiative Act. This is a good bill, and I’m 

happy to urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring the legislation. I’ll speak more on this bill in a little while. So let me just say 

that I’m very happy the Science Committee is taking the lead here 

in this cutting-edge field. 

I also want to thank the Chair for working closely with us to 

draft a bipartisan bill that I think will also be widely supported by 

industry and academia. This bill really is a good example of what 

the Science Committee does best, and I look forward to its passage. 

The second bill we are considering, the National Institute of 

Standards and Technology Reauthorization Act of 2018 is another 

good bill which I’m cosponsoring. This bill reauthorizes one of our 

most important but underappreciated agencies in the Federal Government. NIST is a vital partner for American industry in fields as 

diverse as infrastructure construction to cybersecurity. They’re also 

an essential collaborator with American manufacturing. 

I want to thank the Chairman for working with us to address 

some concerns we had with the original draft of the bill, and I support the manager’s amendment that is intended to address several 

of those concerns. I look forward to advancing this bill through the 

House and working with the Senate to get it enacted. 
689 

Finally, we’re marking up the American Space SAFE Management Act. Unfortunately, I must reluctantly oppose this bill today. 

I want to be clear. I strongly support efforts to establish a civilian 

space situational awareness capacity. However, I do not support 

our Committee rubberstamping the half-baked efforts of the Trump 

Administration to address the issue. 

Currently, the Department of Defense handles space situational 

awareness for the U.S. Government. There’s been a growing recognition that the civilian side of this work would be more appropriate outside DOD. The Obama Administration began to plan for 

this and work was underway to place this function at the Department of Transportation, which currently is the body that promotes 

and regulates commercial space launch and reentry. 

Then, the Trump Administration came in and decided it wanted 

to move this function to the Department of Commerce instead. This 

is in spite of the fact that Commerce has no existing infrastructure 

or expertise to support this important work. In fact, no credible 

reason has been articulated for why the Commerce Department is 

the best place to house the function. The only discernible motivation for reversing course is that they didn’t want to endorse something Obama had started. This is no way to govern, and it wouldn’t 

be the first time this Administration has acted that way. 

I’ll have an amendment later to do this oversight Congress 

should have demanded. I’ve been in hearings in other Committees 

on this very same subject. Let’s have the Academies look at the 

issue and give us guidance on what civilian agency is best suited 

to shoulder this new responsibility. Maybe they decide Commerce 

is the right one, or maybe they will decide that our $21 billion civilian space agency would be best. Then, we can come back and make 

an informed decision instead of just rubberstamping the ill-formed 

ideas coming from the Trump Administration. 

Thank you, and I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you, Chairman Smith, for holding today’s markup of three bills. 

The first bill we are considering is the National Quantum Initiative Act. This is 

a good bill, and I am happy to urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring the 

legislation. I will speak more on this bill in a minute, so let me just say that I am 

very happy the Science Committee is taking the lead here in a cutting-edge field. 

I also want to thank the Chairman for working closely with us to craft a bipartisan 

bill that I think will also be widely supported by industry and academia. This bill 

really is a good example of what the Science Committee does best, and I look forward to its passage. 

The second bill we are considering, the National Institute of Standards and Technology Reauthorization Act of 2018, is another good bill which I am cosponsoring. 

This bill reauthorizes one of our most important but underappreciated agencies in 

the Federal government. NIST is a vital partner for American industry in fields as 

diverse as infrastructure construction to cybersecurity. They are also an essential 

collaborator with American manufacturing. I want to thank the Chairman for working with us to address some concerns we had with the original draft of the bill, and 

I support the manager’s amendment that is intended to address several of those 

concerns. I look forward to advancing this bill through the House and working with 

the Senate to get it enacted. 

Finally, we are marking up the American Space SAFE Management Act. Unfortunately, I must reluctantly oppose this bill today. I want to be clear. I strongly support efforts to establish a civilian space situational awareness capability. However, 

I do not support our Committee rubber stamping the half-baked efforts of the 

Trump Administration to address the issue. 
690 

Currently, the Department of Defense handles space situational awareness for the 

U.S. Government. There has been a growing recognition that the civilian side of this 

work would be more appropriate outside of DOD. The Obama Administration began 

to plan for this, and work was underway to place this function at the Department 

of Transportation, which currently is the body that promotes and regulates commercial space launch and reentry. Then the Trump Administration came in and decided 

it wanted to move this function to the Department of Commerce instead. This is in 

spite of the fact that Commerce has no existing infrastructure or expertise to support this important work. In fact, no credible reason has been articulated for why 

the Commerce Department is the best place to house this function. The only discernible motivation for reversing course is that they just didn’t want to endorse something Obama started. That is a no way to govern, but it wouldn’t be the first time 

this Administration has acted that way. 

I’ll have an amendment later to do the oversight Congress should have demanded 

when the Trump Administration first started pushing this agenda. Let’s have the 

Academies look at the issue and give us guidance on what civilian agency is best 

suited to shoulder this new responsibility. Maybe they decide Commerce is. Or 

maybe they will decide that our 21 billion dollar civilian space agency would be best. 

Then we can come back and make an informed decision, instead of just rubber 

stamping the ill-formed ideas coming from the Trump Administration. I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

H.R. 6227 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 6227, 

the National Quantum Initiative Act. And the clerk will report the 

bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 6227, a bill to provide for coordinated Federal 

program to accelerate quantum research and development for the 

economic and national security of the United States. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point, and I’ll recognize myself to speak on the bill. 

Sixty years ago, the first commercial computer was almost the 

size of this room. Today, we hold more computing power in our 

hand with an iPhone. Just as classical computing redefined the 

20th century, quantum has posed—seems poised to redefine the 

next generation of scientific breakthroughs. 

Conventional computing uses a series of tiny, electronic on-off 

switches within a processing chip. Technological advances have 

made possible supercomputers that can perform series of on-off operations at astonishing speeds. But classical computing technology 

is nearing its limits. Quantum computing is different. Quantum 

computers rely on q-bits. These are subatomic particles that are 

both on and off at the same time. This will enable quantum computers to perform complex calculations at speeds that are potentially millions of times faster than today’s most advanced supercomputers. 

Quantum will create exciting new opportunities in areas like 

cybersecurity, medicine, communications, financial services and 

transportation. But the potential threat to America’s security is sobering. The nation that develops quantum communications technology first may be able to decode, in a matter of seconds, other 

countries’ sensitive national security information, proprietary technologies, and personal information. 

Last October, the Science Committee held a hearing on American 

leadership in quantum technology. Experts testified that, as other 

nations around the word are rapidly advancing quantum programs, 

the United States faces the threat of falling behind. China and the 
691 

European Union are investing billions of dollars in new research 

facilities and equipment for quantum computing. China, in particular, has Stated publicly its national goal of surpassing the 

United States during the next decade. Now is the time to compose 

a national quantum strategy and preserve America’s dominance in 

the scientific world. 

The National Quantum Initiative Act will meet these challenges 

by forming a 10-year program to advance quantum science development and technology applications in the United States. The bill 

leverages the expertise and resources of U.S. industry, academia, 

and government to move quantum information science to the next 

level of research and development. 

The legislation establishes a National Quantum Coordination Office within the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. The office will oversee interagency coordination and strategic 

planning, serve as a central point of contact for stakeholders, conduct outreach, and promote commercialization of Federal research 

by the private sector. 

The bill also supports basic research, education, and standards 

development at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the National Science Foundation, and the Department of 

Energy. Two hundred and twenty-five million dollars a year of 

these agencies’ baseline funding will now be directed to new quantum research centers and laboratory research. Their activities will 

address fundamental research gaps, create a stronger work force, 

and develop revolutionary knowledge and transformative innovations to give U.S. companies and workers an enduring competitive 

advantage. 

The bill ensures that U.S. high-tech companies, which are investing heavily in quantum research, and a surge of quantum technology startups will contribute their knowledge and resources to a 

national effort. 

H.R. 6227 was developed with input from industry, academia, 

national laboratories, Federal agencies, and the Administration. It 

was an open and bipartisan process. The input of those stakeholders has yielded a good consensus bill. We have received broad 

support, including letters from the National Photonics Initiative, 

the Quantum Industry Coalition—which I think consists of about 

15 members—IBM, Intel, Google, Harris Corporation, Yale, Harvard, the University of Maryland, and the Optical Society, among 

many others. 

I thank Ranking Member Johnson for joining me in introducing 

this bill and the many Members of the Committee who have signed 

on as original cosponsors. 

I would also like to acknowledge that Senator Thune and Senator 

Nelson, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Commerce Committee, have introduced a companion bill in the Senate. 

With bipartisan, bicameral support and the backing of the Administration, I believe this bill could become law by the end of the 

year. 

Winning this scientific race requires a new moonshot for the 21st 

century. This bill will align ongoing Federal, academic, and private 

sector research for a quantum leap in the right direction. 
692 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

Sixty years ago, the first commercial computer was almost the size of this room. 

Today we hold more computing power in our hand with an I-phone. 

Just as classical computing redefined the 20th Century, quantum is poised to redefine the next generation of scientific breakthroughs. 

Conventional computing uses a series of tiny, electronic on-off switches within a 

processing chip. Technological advances have made possible supercomputers that 

can perform series of on-off operations at astonishing speeds. But classical computing technology is nearing its limits. 

Quantum computing is different. Quantum computers rely on ‘‘q-bits.’’ These are 

subatomic particles that are both on and off at the same time. 

This will enable quantum computers to perform complex calculations at speeds 

that are potentially millions of times faster than today’s most advanced supercomputers. 

Quantum will create exciting new opportunities in areas like cyber security, medicine, communications, financial services and transportation. 

But the potential threat to America’s security is sobering. The nation that develops quantum communications technology first may be able to decode-in a matter of 

seconds-other countries’ sensitive national security information, proprietary technologies and personal information. 

Last October, the Science Committee held a hearing on ‘‘American Leadership in 

Quantum Technology.’’ Experts testified that as other nations around the word are 

rapidly advancing quantum programs, the United States faces the threat of falling 

behind. 

China and the European Union are investing billions of dollars in new research 

facilities and equipment for quantum computing. China, in particular, has stated 

publicly its national goal of surpassing the U.S. during the next decade. 

Now is the time to compose a national quantum strategy and preserve America’s 

dominance in the scientific world. 

The National Quantum Initiative Act will meet these challenges by forming a 10- 

year program to advance quantum science development and technology applications 

in the United States. 

The bill leverages the expertise and resources of U.S. industry, academia and government to move quantum information science to the next level of research and development. 

The legislation establishes a National Quantum Coordination Office within the 

White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. 

The office will oversee interagency coordination and strategic planning, serve as 

a central point of contact for stakeholders, conduct outreach and promote commercialization of federal research by the private sector. 

The bill also supports basic research, education and standards development at the 

National Institute of Standards and Technology, the National Science Foundation, 

and the Department of Energy. 

$225 million a year of these agencies’ baseline funding will now be directed to new 

quantum research centers and laboratory research. Their activities will address fundamental research gaps, create a stronger workforce, and develop revolutionary 

knowledge and transformative innovations to give U.S. companies and workers an 

enduring competitive advantage. 

The bill ensures that U.S. high-tech companies, which are investing heavily in 

quantum research, and a surge of quantum technology start-ups will contribute 

their knowledge and resources to a national effort. 

H.R. 6227 was developed with input from industry, academia, National Laboratories, federal agencies and the administration. It was an open and bipartisan process. 

The input of those stakeholders has yielded a good consensus bill. 

We have received broad support, including letters from the National Photonics 

Initiative, the Quantum Industry Coalition, IBM, Intel, Google, Harris Corporation, 

Yale, Harvard, the University of Maryland and the Optical Society. 

I thank Ranking Member Johnson for joining me in introducing this bill, and the 

many members of the committee who have signed on as original co-sponsors. 

I would also like to acknowledge that Senator Thune and Senator Nelson, the 

Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Commerce Committee, have introduced a companion bill in the Senate. With bipartisan, bicameral support and the 

backing of the administration, I believe this bill could become law by the end of the 

year. 
693 

Winning this scientific race requires a new moonshot for the 21st Century. This 

bill will align ongoing federal, academic and private sector research for a quantum 

leap in the right direction. 

Chairman SMITH. That concludes my statement, and now, the 

Ranking Member Ms. Johnson is recognized for hers. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I appreciate the fact that you’ve introduced H.R. 6227, the National Quantum Initiative Act, on which I’m happy to be a cosponsor. 

This legislation will establish a national program to accelerate 

progress in research and technology development related to quantum information science. Research in this area promises to revolutionize the way we solve problems by leveraging quantum effects 

such as superposition and entanglement. 

Many believe quantum computing technology has the potential to 

accelerate progress on some of our most pressing challenges, including how to address climate change and understand complex 

diseases like cancer. The race is on to build the world’s first quantum computer capable of solving problems that have long eluded 

conventional computers. Not unlike the space race in the 1960’s, 

the stakes in today’s quantum race are high. 

Global leadership in quantum computing brings with it a military and intelligence edge, as well as a competitive advantage in 

what many expect to be a massive industry for decades to come. 

The National Quantum Initiative authorized in this bill enables coordinated activities at the Department of Education, the National 

Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology, as well as many other important Federal agencies that 

will have a role in developing and benefiting from these technologies. 

Along with sustaining support for research in this area in general, DOE and NSF will fund new national centers to bring together preeminent experts in quantum science, hardware and software development, and education at NIST will lead the way in developing the measurement and standards infrastructure vital to 

the emerging industry. 

By promoting access to the products of these activities across the 

Federal Government and to academia and the private sector, the 

National Quantum Initiative enables—ensures that we will maximize the return on this investment. We must invest more in this 

research. We need to ensure that we are educating and training 

the next generation of top quantum scientists and engineers, and 

we should do more to encourage partnerships between government, 

academia, and industry. 

This is good legislation, and this will let us—or put us on the 

right track, and I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting its 

passage. 

Chairman SMITH. And you yield back? The gentlewoman yields 

back, and her statement is appreciated. 

We will now go to amendments on this particular bill, and the 

first one is going to be offered by the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. 

Hultgren, and he is recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at the desk. 
694 

Chairman SMITH. And the—I’m sorry. The clerk will report the 

amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 6227, offered by Mr. Hultgren 

of Illinois, amendment number 002. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Without objection, the amendment will be 

considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized. 

Mr. HULTGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

My amendment adds a provision to the duties of the National 

Quantum Coordination Office tasking it with and ensuring that the 

Federal research agencies, through their quantum research programs and the new NSF and DOE centers, are utilizing existing 

quantum computers and communication systems for federally funded research. 

Several U.S. companies, universities, and laboratories have developed or are developing functioning quantum systems. It’s important that the government not duplicate those efforts already underway but tap those resources to further basic research and application development. 

DOE, NSF, and NIST have all supported research grants in the 

past, utilizing private supercomputer and cloud computing systems, 

and this will ensure that they continue to do the same thing for 

quantum systems. 

Again, I want to thank Chairman Smith and Ranking Member 

Johnson for working with me and the external stakeholders on this 

amendment, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Hultgren. 

I support the amendment and recommend our colleagues support 

it as well. 

Is there any further discussion? 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Move to strike the last word? 

Chairman SMITH. Who seeks recognize? Oh, I’m sorry. Mr. Lipinski is recognized. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I support the amendment, and I thank the Chairman for working 

in a bipartisan way on this bill. I think it’s very important that 

what we—we do what we aim to accomplish in this bill: Invest significant Federal resources in a promising technology whose benefits 

may be a long way off but where there’s fierce international competition. 

It’s going to be through strategic decisions like these that we will 

become the world’s economic, scientific, and technical leader in this 

as we start out now, and we can only maintain that position 

through continuous significant investment in cutting-edge basic research. We know other countries are increasing their investments 

in quantum technology, in some cases guided by long-term strategies, and this bill will make sure that we develop a coherent strategy of our own. 

Mr. Hultgren and I were—both come from the Chicago area, and 

I think it’s important to highlight and commend the research partnership from Chicago that’s been instrumental in contributing to 

the Committee’s understanding of quantum information science, including testifying at hearings, participating in roundtables, and reviewing drafts of this legislation. 
695 

Chicago Quantum Exchange, the partnership between University 

of Chicago, Argonne National Lab, and Fermi National Accelerator 

Lab, Chairman Weber had a codel out to the—these labs a few 

weeks ago, and a number of Members of the Committee got to hear 

more about what they’re doing when it comes to quantum. 

The Exchange was created to develop and grow interdisciplinary 

collaborations for the exploration and development of new quantum-enabled technologies and to help educate a new generation of 

quantum information scientists and engineers. 

Partnership with the private sector is also an important element 

of the Exchange. Chicago Quantum Exchange may be a model for 

the future of R&D in quantum information science, and this bill 

will help that and help our country when it comes to moving ahead 

with quantum. 

With that, I yield—my colleagues to support the amendment and 

the bill, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski. 

Is there any further discussion? 

If not, the question is on the Hultgren amendment. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

The next amendment is going to be offered by the gentleman 

from California, Mr. Rohrabacher, and he’s recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 6227, offered by Mr. Rohrabacher of California, amendment number 057. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment will be considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Ronald Reagan, who I once worked for, once said, ‘‘No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So government’s programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, they’re the nearest thing to eternal life we’ll ever see on this earth,’’ end of quote. 

My amendment would end the National Nanotechnology Initiative 

by transitioning the duties and activities to the appropriate Federal agencies and offices as we stand up the National Quantum Initiative. 

Since the passage of the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research 

and Development Act of 2003, which I supported, the Nanotechnology Initiative, which I—which is the NTI—has helped make the 

United States a global leader in nanotechnology. From Fiscal Year 

2001 through Fiscal Year 2015, the Federal Government has spent 

approximately $20 billion, close to $21 billion actually, in this—in 

nanoscale research, engineering technology through the NNI. 

After years of nanotechnology research, Federal agencies have 

well-established this research, nanotechnology research, and regulatory activities. Nanotechnology is not some new morphous thing 

that we are trying to get a handle on and build a strategy around. 

We have been successful at that. And while I am certain some level 
696 

of cross-collaboration will continue to be useful in this area, there 

is no longer any necessity for this overreaching program. The NNI 

is 15 years old this year. The Manhattan Project lasted 5 years. 

The Human Genome Project—and I—again, which I supported, 

lasted 13 years. 

There is clearly more research to be done in nanotechnology, and 

this proposal doesn’t stop Federal agencies from pursuing nanotechnology in their specific areas, but this type of overarching coordination and spending has reached its logical endpoint. The NNI 

has been a great catalyst to bring our Nation to the next level, but 

continuing it requires the use of limited resources, which threatens 

new initiatives like the National Quantum Initiative, which is critical for America’s future. We should not continue to subsidize our 

focus. It is important to sunset these things, and they should not 

just go on in perpetuity. 

I would not the Quantum Initiative and the base bill sunsets, 

what we are about to pass, sunsets after 10 years. And I know 

some will oppose what I’m suggesting here as a reflexive refusal to 

end any government program, to close any government office, no 

matter how clearly it has outlived its usefulness. But I would note 

that the NNI was never intended to be a never-ending entitlement. 

That—and again, I voted for that initiative when we started it, but 

it wasn’t meant to be a never-ending program. The program has 

succeeded in helping push the United States to the next frontier of 

nanotechnology. It did its job, and now it’s time to move on to the 

next phase, which is the Quantum Initiative. 

And the Quantum Initiative is a proper way for Congress to coordinate and support pioneering scientific research over the next 

decade by establishing a 10-year framework, which is what our bill 

does, for moving quantum past this point and into the next stage 

of development, just—which is to maintain scientific leadership in 

the—for the United States. 

All things being said, I have no interest in derailing this agreement that our Chairman and others have worked so hard to put 

in place. So I expect to withdraw this amendment once everyone 

has had an opportunity to discuss it, and I thought I would add 

these thoughts so people can basically understand the dynamics of 

why we have a $20 trillion bill that we’re passing on to future generations. We need to be able to end programs as well as begin 

them. We cannot create endless programs and initiatives that— 

with no end dates included. 

John Kennedy set the goal of landing a man on the moon before 

the decade was out. Deadlines focus minds and efforts. End points 

for our programs can be just as important as starting points. And 

so I will be withdrawing my amendment if there’s no other discussion. But I thank the leadership for the initiative that you’re showing today. And let us be responsible when we create new initiatives 

that are important for our country. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Mr. Rohrabacher, thank you for your good 

points. As you suggested, we’ll see if there’s any further discussion, 

but I appreciate your willingness to withdraw the amendment and 

let us advance the legislation. 
697 

But is there any further discussion on this particular amendment? 

If not, without objection, the amendment will be—— 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I withdraw my amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, so ordered. Thank you, Mr. 

Rohrabacher. 

The last amendment is by the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Foster, and he is recognized to offer the amendment. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, Mr.—Chairman Smith. I’d like to also 

thank my colleague, Congresswoman Esty, for—— 

Chairman SMITH. OK. And the clerk will report the amendment 

first. 

Mr. FOSTER. Oh. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 6227, offered by Mr. Foster of 

Illinois, amendment number 110. 

Chairman SMITH. And, without objection, the amendment is considered as read. And the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you, Chairman Smith. 

I’d like to thank my colleague, Congresswoman Esty, for cosponsoring this amendment, which I intend to withdraw at the conclusion of the debate. 

This was a very—a few months ago we held a joint Subcommittee hearing on American leadership in quantum technology, 

and this was a very productive and bipartisan discussion, and I’m 

glad that the Committee followed up with outreach to many stakeholders on this important issue. 

I join my Republican and Democratic colleagues in supporting 

the National Quantum Initiative. I appreciate that this bill instructs the coordination of quantum research and development 

across agencies and with industry and academic partners. I believe 

this is key to ensuring the success of this effort. 

I would like to emphasize that this is a technically risky endeavor, and neither technological success nor practical—nor great practical relevance is assured. But I’m proud that Congress is operating 

on the advice of top scientists is willing to take that risk. 

There’s a famous quote that’s attributed to two great scientists— 

Michael Faraday and Benjamin Franklin—when asked about new 

technologies such as electricity and what the practical relevance is, 

and their response was ‘‘Of what use is a newborn baby?’’ And this 

I think really is a fair description of quantum technology at this 

point. 

However, given the bipartisan support for this initiative, I was 

disappointed to see that this bill explicitly does not fund the participating agencies to start several new activities. And my amendment today corrects this problem by striking language in the bill 

that States that no additional funds are authorized to carry out the 

National Quantum Initiative. 

The decision to legislative new activities without new funding 

would inevitably mean that other valuable research in these agencies would suffer. I’m also concerned that the Director of National 

Quantum Coordination Office is appointed by the Director of the 

Office of Science and Technology Policy, a position that President 

Trump has not filled almost 2 years into his term of office. 
698 

Now, I understand that the Chair is opposed to this amendment, 

so as a courtesy to him, I will withdraw it, but I do hope to work 

with my Republican colleagues to increase funding for the participating agencies so that the National Quantum Initiative can be 

properly funded without damage to other activities. 

And with that, I’d like to yield 1 minute to my colleague, Ms. 

Esty. 

Ms. ESTY. Thank you. And I, too—and I know from our hearings 

that quantum has enormous potential for this country, and other 

countries are leaning in hard, allocating lots of resources. And I 

think it would be pennywise and pound foolish for us to try to support in name this initiative and not actually secure vital funding. 

We know China is investing massive resources in basic R&D, and 

again, for us to remain on the cutting edge, we need to actually 

back that up with some resources. 

So I join my colleague Mr. Foster and thank him for raising this 

amendment, and I think it’s important, and I hope moving forward 

we can look to find a way to ensure that this critically important 

initiative receives the funding—not just the titles but the funding 

it’s going to need to, again, keep the United States on that cutting 

edge of research and allow us to be competitive in the world. 

Thank you, and I yield back. 

Mr. FOSTER. Thank you. And I—— 

Chairman SMITH. OK. 

Mr. FOSTER [continuing]. Withdraw the amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you, Mr. Foster. And thank you, 

Ms. Esty, as well. 

Let me say that I know you all are aware of the constraints we 

sometimes operate under, and under House rules, we can’t increase 

the funding right now. But let me reassure both of you that I do 

support an increase in funding and will look for ways to try to 

achieve that. 

And, Mr. Foster, I appreciate the courtesy, and without objection, 

the amendment is withdrawn. 

If there are no further amendments, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 6227 to the House, as amended, with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 6227 to the House, 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it. The bill is ordered reported favorably. 

And without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the 

table. H.R. 6227 is ordered reported to the House. I ask unanimous 

consent that staff be authorized to make any necessary technical 

and conforming changes. And without objection, so ordered. 

H.R. 6229 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, we now go to H.R. 6229, 

the National Institute of Standards and Technology Reauthorization Act of 2018. And the clerk will report the bill. 
699 

The CLERK. H.R. 22—6229, a bill to authorize the programs of 

the National Institute of Standards and Technology and for other 

purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. 

And I understand we will now go to the gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Lucas, for a statement. 

Mr. LUCAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to 

speak on behalf of Subcommittee Chairman Comstock’s bill, H.R. 

6229, the National Institute of Standards and Technology Reauthorization Act of 2018. NIST works to promote innovation and industry competitiveness 

by advancing measurement science, standards, and technology. 

This legislation authorizes NIST’s Industrial Technology Services 

account, construction accounts, and bolsters the Science and Technical Research and Services lab account for fiscal years of 2018 and 

2019. 

NIST has the mission and capabilities to contribute to areas critical to the United States’ global competitiveness. To this end, for 

Fiscal Year 2019, this legislation authorizes increased investments 

in four emerging technology areas: Quantum science, artificial 

science, data science, advanced communications, and the Internet 

of Things and composites research and standards development. 

As we’ve just heard during our consideration of the National 

Quantum Initiative Act of 2018, an international race to claim 

quantum supremacy has begun. And it is not just in quantum that 

we are racing our international rivals to develop. By facilitating 

NIST’s development of tools to address performance and reliability 

concerns of artificial intelligence, NIST will develop—will accelerate I should say the implementation of AI systems and give U.S. 

industries a competitive edge. The discoveries and technological advances that will stem from these investments will significantly affect the Nation’s economy in decades to come. 

One of the great challenges of the 21st century is cybersecurity, 

and this legislation helps NIST address growing cyber threat landscape by providing for the increase of its fundamental and applied 

cyber research to address key questions relating to the measurement of privacy, security, and the vulnerability of software tools 

and communication networks. 

This Committee has held multiple hearings on cybersecurity 

since the news that the Office of Personnel Management, OPM, 

was the target of two massive data breaches, exposing the sensitive 

information of over 21 million Americans, and yes, many of our 

constituents. 

Last month, the office of OMB published the Federal 

Cybersecurity Risk Determination Report and Action Plan in accordance with Trump Executive Order 13800. The report identifies 

that 74 percent of Federal agencies participating in the risk assessment process have cybersecurity programs that are either at risk 

or high risk. The report also confirms the need to take bold approaches to improve Federal cybersecurity. 

NIST plays a very important role in protecting from cyber 

threats through its ongoing cybersecurity research, including the 

applications of blockchain technology and by providing guidelines 
700 

and standards to help reduce cyber risk in Federal agencies and 

critical infrastructure. This legislation requires NIST to enhance 

and expand its guidance and assist Federal agencies to help them 

to effectively use the NIST-authored Framework for Improving 

Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity. The President’s executive 

order directed each agency to use the framework. It is my hope 

that this language will prompt agencies to rely on NIST’s expertise 

in order to adopt these best risk management practices within their 

agencies. 

This Committee has a long, bipartisan record of support for NIST 

and its contribution to research and development. It is my hope 

that all of my colleagues on the Committee will continue that tradition and support this bill. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for bringing this important 

piece of legislation up for consideration. Thank you, Ranking Member Johnson, Ranking Member Lipinski, and other Members of the 

Committee for your work with the Chairwoman and supporting 

this bill. 

I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Chairman. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. LUCAS

Thank you Mr. Chairman for the opportunity to speak on behalf of my bill, H.R. 

6229, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Reauthorization 

Act of 2018. 

NIST works to promote U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards and technology. This legislation authorizes 

NIST’s Industrial Technology Services account, construction accounts, and bolsters 

the Scientific and Technical Research and Services lab account for fiscal years 2018 

and 2019. 

NIST has the mission and capabilities to contribute to areas critical to the United 

States’ global competitiveness. To this end, for fiscal year 2019, this legislation authorizes increased investments in four emerging technology areas: Quantum science, 

artificial intelligence and data science, advanced communications and the internet 

of things and composites research and standards development. 

As we’ve just heard during our consideration of the National Quantum Initiative 

Act of 2018, an international race to claim quantum supremacy has begun. And it 

is not just in quantum that we are racing our international rivals to develop. By 

facilitating NIST’s development of tools to address performance and reliability concerns of artificial intelligence (AI), NIST will accelerate the implementation of AI 

systems and give U.S. industries a competitive edge. 

The discoveries and technological advances that will stem from these investments 

will significantly affect the nation’s economy in the coming decades. 

One of the great challenges of the 21st Century is cybersecurity. This legislation 

helps NIST address the growing cybersecurity threat landscape by providing for the 

increase of its fundamental and applied cybersecurity research to address key questions relating to the measurement of privacy, security and the vulnerability of software tools and communication networks. 

This committee has held multiple hearings on cybersecurity since the news that 

the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) was the target of two massive data 

breaches-exposing the sensitive information of over 21 million Americans, including 

me and many of my constituents. 

Last month the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) published its ‘‘Federal 

Cybersecurity Risk Determination Report and Action Plan’’ in accordance with 

Trump Executive Order 13800. The report identifies that 74 percent of federal agencies participating in the risk assessment process have cybersecurity programs that 

are either at risk or high risk. The report also confirms the need to take bold approaches to improve federal cybersecurity. 

NIST plays a very important role in protecting from cyber threats through its ongoing cybersecurity research, including the applications of blockchain technology, 

and by providing guidelines and standards to help reduce cyber risks in federal 

agencies and critical infrastructure. This legislation requires NIST to enhance and 

expand its guidance and assistance to Federal Agencies to help them to effectively 
701 

use the NIST-authored ‘‘Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure 

Cybersecurity.’’ 

The President’s Executive Order directed each agency to use the framework. It 

is my hope that this language will prompt agencies to rely on NIST’s expertise in 

order to adopt these best risk management practices within their agencies. 

This committee has a long, bipartisan record of support for NIST and its contributions to research and development. It is my hope that all of my colleagues on the 

committee will continue that tradition and support this bill. Thank you again Mr. 

Chairman for bringing this important piece of legislation up for consideration, and 

thank you to Ranking Member Johnson, Ranking Member Lipinski and the many 

other members of this committee for working with me and supporting this bill. I 

yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lucas. 

I also want to mention that the sponsor of the bill, Barbara Comstock, is at a funeral and appreciate the gentleman from Oklahoma 

stepping in for her. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman from Illinois, Mr.—— 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Move to strike the last word. 

Chairman SMITH [continuing]. Lipinski. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized. 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Thank you. I appreciate the majority moving this 

bill and happy to cosponsor it with the assurances of the manager’s 

amendment, which I believe will momentarily be passing. We really need—this really helps to put NIST in a good position to carry 

out its work through the end of Fiscal Year 2019. And, as we all 

know, NIST expertise across many fields is critical to our economy, 

our research enterprise, and our manufacturing sector. 

And I want to particularly highlight the strong support for the 

Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership and the Manufacturing USA programs, which received robust authorization under 

the Industrial Technology Services account. And I thank the majority for their willingness to increase the Fiscal Year 2019 authorization level to match the agency request. 

I have a strong relationship with the Manufacturing USA Institute for Digital Manufacturing located just outside my district in 

Chicago. Through partnerships with universities, manufacturers, 

nonprofits, and government entities, they work to develop the technology-enabled manufacturing tools industry needs, pilot them on 

the factory floor, and train the manufacturing work force. 

Beyond manufacturing, I also want to highlight the critical position pay authority this bill gives NIST to hire talented 

cybersecurity and quantum information science professionals. It is 

often difficult for Federal agencies to attract top-level talent in 

these fields because the Federal pay scale cannot compete with the 

private sector. This bill grants a limited exemption to the Federal 

pay scale to ensure that NIST will have access to the right people 

to lead the Nation in cybersecurity and quantum information 

science. This is an issue that has been raised before this Committee in hearings, and so I’m very happy that we do this in the 

bill. It will certainly be very helpful to hire the people that we 

need. So I want to urge my colleagues to support the bill and yield 

back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lipinski. 
702 

We will now proceed with amendments, and the first one up is 

the manager’s amendment that will be offered by the gentleman 

from Oklahoma, Mr. Lucas. And he’s recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 6229, offered by Mr. Lucas of 

Oklahoma on behalf of Mrs. Comstock of Virginia, amendment 

number 01. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized to 

explain the amendment. 

Mr. LUCAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I offer today a manager’s 

amendment on behalf of Chair Comstock that makes a few changes 

in the bill, responding to feedback from Members of the Committee. 

The amendment authorizes the current level for NIST’s Industrial 

Technology Services account in the fiscal years of 2018 and 2019. 

It also clarifies NIST’s role in assisting Federal agencies and their 

staffs with using NIST’s framework for improving critical infrastructure cybersecurity. 

I want to thank the Chairman, the Ranking Member, and Ranking Member Lipinski for working with the Chairwoman on this 

manager’s amendment, and I urge my colleagues to support the 

amendment and reserve the balance of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lucas. 

Is there any further discussion on the amendment? 

The gentleman from New York, Mr. Tonko, is recognized. 

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I move to strike the last word because I’m relieved that we were 

able to work in a bipartisan manner to restore level funding for the 

Fiscal Year 2019 funding for the Industrial Technology Service’s activities, which include important manufacturing programs such as 

NNMI and MEP. 

Manufacturing is critical to the American economy, to jobs, and 

our national security. Our manufacturing sector employs nearly 1 

in 10 of our workers, makes up some 12 percent of our GDP. 

Reports have confirmed that, on average, each manufacturing job 

creates additional three to four jobs due to the required research, 

development, and process design and needed supply chain and 

post-sales services, as well as boosting the service sector as a result 

of high-paying manufacturing jobs with an average annual compensation of about $80,000. 

Personally, I strongly believe that the government should be a 

partner in working to revitalize and strengthen the U.S. manufacturing sector and that NIST plays a vital role in this endeavor. As 

a Representative for the capital region of New York, I realize that 

moving toward an innovation economy is the key to economic 

growth. With that in mind, I am pleased to witness our Nation’s 

renewed desire to invest in a high-tech manufacturing effort and 

in an innovation economy. 

I was proud when we came together as a Nation and made a 

commitment to invest in manufacturing when we created the firstever national network of manufacturing hubs or National Network 
703 

of Manufacturing Initiative, NNMI, through the overwhelming bipartisan package of the Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation, or RAMI, Act. I see great hope for these efforts if we have 

continued support and sustained long-term funding, as we see in 

other countries. 

NNMIs help accelerate Innovation by investing in industrially 

relevant manufacturing technologies with broad applications and 

by supporting manufacturing technology commercialization, by 

bridging the gap between the laboratory and the market. 

They also support the work of MEPs. The MEP program is a nationwide network of proven resources that enables manufacturers 

to complete—or to compete rather globally, supports greater supply 

chain integration, and provides access to information, training, and 

technologies that improve efficiency, productivity, and profitability. 

The MEP program’s well-documented impact is substantial. In 

Fiscal Year 2016 alone MEP projects with small and medium-size 

manufacturers created or retained some 68,477 jobs, generated 

more than $8 billion in new and retained sales, and provide cost 

savings of more than $1.2 billion. 

I thank this Committee for continued support of NNMIs and 

MEPs, which are both vital to revitalizing and supporting American manufacturing. While I support visionary investments that include increases and sustained long-term funding, I am relieved that 

at least this funding has been restored to Fiscal Year 2019. 

And with that, Mr. Chair, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. All right. Thank you, Mr. Tonko, for those comments. 

If there’s no further discussion, the question is on the Lucas 

amendment. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

Mr. Tonko, after that last great statement, do you still want to 

offer an amendment? 

Mr. TONKO. Well, I have an amendment at the desk, Mr. Chair, 

but because of the manager’s amendment, I don’t know if there’s 

anyone that wants to speak to my amendment, but if not, I would 

withdraw. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. I appreciate that. Without objection, the 

amendment is withdrawn. 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman from California, Mr. Rohrabacher, seeks recognition. What—— 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. As we move forward with this reauthorization, let us note that in the Constitution of the United States at 

article 1, section 8 of the Constitution establishes what authorities 

we have in our—what we are dealing from, the legal authority we 

started and where we’re at. And in article 1, section 8, it says that 

the Federal Government shall have the power to fix standards and 

weights and measures. And I think that what we’re doing today, 

I think—when we’re—when we have such a massive debt that 

we’re having to deal with, we need to go back and understand that 
704 

when we are doing things that are fundamental and are important 

and fixing the standards and weights and measures for our country 

is exactly what NIST is all about and exactly what science is all 

about. 

And this I believe I would just like to remind our colleagues that 

we’re doing something that our Founding Fathers could envision us 

doing, but it’s up to us to do so in a responsible manner. 

Thank you very much. 

Chairman SMITH. Good reminder, Mr. Rohrabacher. Thank you 

for that. 

If there are no further amendments, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 6229 to the House, as amended, with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 6229 to the House. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

H.R. 6229 is ordered reported to the House. I ask unanimous consent that the staff be authorized to make any necessary technical 

and conforming changes. And without objection, so ordered. 

H.R. 6226 

Chairman SMITH. Great. We now go to consideration of H.R. 

6226, and pursuant to notice, I call up H.R. 6226, the American 

Space SAFE Management Act. And the clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 6226, a bill to direct the Secretary of Commerce 

to provide for civil space situational awareness services and information and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. And I’ll recognize myself to speak in favor of the legislation. 

The world is on the cusp of an amazing revolution in space. 

Today, there are 1,100 active satellites in orbit. In a few years, 

there will be tens of thousands. And a variety of new and dynamic 

spacecraft will go into operation, such as private space stations, onorbit repair and refueling satellites, and celestial resource prospectors. With this great increase in activity, it is time for our Nation to lead the world by establishing a space traffic management 

framework that will ensure a safe operating environment in outer 

space. 

The American Space SAFE Management Act addresses this timely and important challenge facing spacefaring nations. It does so by 

addressing science and technology, space situational awareness, 

and space traffic management. First, this act directs the Administration to coordinate its Federal research and development investments in space traffic management. It also directs the Administration to work collaboratively with the private sector. Finally, it establishes a NASA Center of Excellence that will develop, lead, and 

promote research in space traffic management. 

Second, this act creates a space situational awareness, or SSA, 

program within the Department of Commerce. Commerce will provide a basic level of SSA information and services, free of charge, 
705 

to the public. While the Department of Defense retains the tracking sources currently used to compile the catalog of space objects, 

Commerce will augment that with data from other sources, including the private sector and foreign partners. 

Many stakeholders want access not only to SSA services but also 

to the underlying data, so this act establishes a space situational 

awareness testbed that complements the broader SSA program. 

This testbed will allow the public to access certain SSA data subject to relevant national security and foreign policy concerns. 

Third, a space traffic management framework will be established. This framework will be built on top-down voluntary guidelines developed by the government, bottom-up standards developed 

by industry, and a pilot space traffic coordination program. The 

pilot program will allow the government and stakeholders to experiment and learn more about the best ways to manage space traffic. 

This framework is a commonsense first step in what will be a longterm process of developing a comprehensive space traffic management framework. 

The American Space SAFE Management Act is the culmination 

of years of work that this Committee has undertaken. Over 4 years 

ago, this Committee held its first of several hearings on space traffic management followed by many hearings, roundtable events, and 

meetings with stakeholders. The Space SAFE Management Act has 

the full support of the President; Vice President; the National 

Space Council; and Secretaries of Defense, Transportation, and 

Commerce. 

Original co-sponsors include Space Subcommittee Chairman 

Brian Babin, Representative Bera, Representative Lucas, Representative Perlmutter, and Representative Rohrabacher. Thanks 

go to the Committee Members and staff for developing this historymaking, commonsense, bipartisan bill. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

The world is on the cusp of an amazing revolution in space. Today, there are eleven hundred active satellites in orbit. In a few years, there will be tens of thousands. 

And, a variety of new and dynamic spacecraft will go into operation, such as private 

space stations, on-orbit repair and refueling satellites and celestial resource prospectors. 

With this great increase in activity, it is time for our nation to lead the world 

by establishing a space traffic management framework that will ensure a safe operating environment in outer space. 

The American Space SAFE Management Act addresses this timely and important 

challenge facing spacefaring nations. It does so by addressing science and technology, space situational awareness, and space traffic management. 

First, this act directs the administration to coordinate its Federal research and 

development investments in space traffic management. It also directs the administration to work collaboratively with the private sector. Finally, it establishes a 

NASA Center of Excellence that will develop, lead and promote research in space 

traffic management. 

Second, this act creates a civil space situational awareness (SSA) program within 

the Department of Commerce. Commerce will provide a basic level of SSA information and services, free of charge, to the public. While the Department of Defense 

retains the tracking sources currently used to compile the catalog of space objects, 

Commerce will augment that with data from other sources, including the private 

sector and foreign partners. 

Many stakeholders want access not only to SSA services but also to the underlying data. So this act establishes a space situational awareness testbed that complements the broader SSA program. This testbed will allow the public to access certain SSA data subject to relevant national security and foreign policy concerns. 
706 

Third, a space traffic management framework will be established. This framework 

will be built on top-down voluntary guidelines developed by the government, bottomup standards developed by industry and a pilot space traffic coordination program. 

The pilot program will allow the government and stakeholders to experiment and 

learn more about the best ways to manage space traffic. This framework is a commonsense first step in what will be a long-term process of developing a comprehensive space traffic management framework. 

The American Space SAFE Management Act is the culmination of years of work 

that this committee has undertaken. Over four years ago, this committee held its 

first of several hearings on space traffic management followed by many hearings, 

roundtable events and meetings with stakeholders. 

The Space SAFE Management Act has the full support of the president, vice-president, the National Space Council, and the Secretaries of Defense, Transportation 

and Commerce. 

Original co-sponsors include Space Subcommittee Chairman Brian Babin, Rep. 

Bera, Rep. Lucas, Rep. Perlmutter and Rep. Rohrabacher. Thanks go to the committee members and staff for developing this history-making, common sense, bipartisan bill. 

Chairman SMITH. At this time, I ask unanimous consent to enter 

in the record letters of support for the American Space SAFE Management Act from the following organizations: Commercial 

Spaceflight Federation, a trade association with over 80 members, 

companies, and organizations; Bigelow Aerospace; Maxar; and 

SpaceX. 
707 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chairman 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

U.S. House of Representatives 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith: 

June 25, 2018 

Thank you for your leadership on the American Space SAFE Management Act. This bill is 

an important step to ensuring continued safe and affordable access to space consistent with 

U.S. civil, commercial, and national security objectives. 

SpaceX is committed to responsible stewardship of the space environment. As the number 

of operators in space continues to grow~ the U.S. should develop an appropriate civil 

agency interface to share space situational awareness (SSA) inforrnation with the 

commercial sector to ensure a safe space environment. This legislation supports ongoing 

collaboration between the private sector and the government lhrough the Department of 

Commerce to develop best practices and to share data. 

SpaceX appreciates the Committee's engagement with industry throughout the legislative 

process and looks fofVIard to continuing to work with lhe Committee as these issues evolve. 

Sincerely. 

Tim Hughes 

Senior Vice President, Global Business & Government Affairs 

1155FStrnet,NW Suit>.~475 Wa~hlngto'1,CC20004 
708 

MA~AR TliCHNOLOGIIiS 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chairman 

Science, Space, and Technology Committee 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith: 

.June 26, 2018 

As the United States continues to lead the way in the commercialization of space, we must also 

lead the way in managing space as a domain. Among the most important tasks at present are 

space situational awareness (SSA) and space traffic management (STM). The ability to track 

objects in space and to plan our activities to minimize damage to assets and the creation of debris 

is critical to our endeavors. 

You and your colleagues on the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee understand 

this well. Your American Space SAFE Management Act is an important contribution to this vital 

effort. The bill promotes SSA and STM research and development, which will help modernize the 

nation's capabilities as tracking and management challenges grow more difficult. It creates a civil 

SSA program to provide SSA information and to relieve the US Air Force of the burden it currently 

carries. It creates a pathway for a STM framework with voluntary guidelines, practices, and 

standards, which will help arrive at best practices without rushing to regulate. And it creates a 

civil space coordination pilot program that will help improve spaceflight safety by serving as a 

testbed for communication and coordination among operators. 

As one of the world's leading manufacturers, operators, and users of satellites and other space 

assets, Maxar Technologies supports the objectives of the bill. Thank you for your leadership on 

this important matter. We look forward to working with you and the Senate as the American 

Space SAFE Management Act advances. 

Matey . e 

Senior Vice President 

Government Relations & Public Policy 

2107 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 110, Arlington, VA 22201 +1 703.480.9589 
709 

MADE 

IN SPACE 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chairman 

Science, Space, and Technology Committee 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington DC 20515 

June 26, 2018 

Made In Space, Inc. 

8226 Philips Hwy 

Suite 102 

Jacksonville, Fl 32256 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member 

Science, Space, and Technology Committee 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson: 

Made In Space sees a future where life and work in space are commonplace. As the space-based 

manufacturing company leading the way toward that future, we envision a space environment full of 

human activity: satellites, vehicles, habitats, factories, and tourist destinations. 

A busy space environment requires good Space Situational Awareness (SSA) and Space Traffic 

Management (STM) in order to keep space free of conjunctions and resultant debris. Your American 

Space SAFE Management Act will help the United States develop the kinds of SSA and STM capabilities 

that will enable the future we envision, which is why Made In Space supports this legislation. 

We appreciate the Science, Space, and Technology Committee's attention to this important issue and 

look forward to working with you as the bill proceeds. 

Sincerely, 

Made In Space, Inc. 

andrew@madeinspace.us 

www-.madeinspace.us Tel; 650.701.7722 
710 

& ASSOCIATES 

28June2018 

Chairman Smith 

US House or Representatives 

Science, Space and Technology Committee 

Subject: Support of American Space "SAFE" Management Act of 2018 

Via: Dr. Mick Mineiro, 

Attention: Chairman Smith 

Today I rise in support of the American Space "SAFE" Management Act. The time has come for 

the US Government and Industry to turn our telescope around and view the market in a 

different way. Times have changed and the market Is rapidly shifting. A new and enlightening 

conversation regarding space traffic management is emerging because American Industrial 

excellence has created an emerging need. That is a good problem to have and this bUI enables 

a needed debate on several emerging regulatory matters which must be addressed as the 

industry accelerates to new heights. 

cc. Congressman Brian Babin, TX 

STUI\IlT@WIHAJIIOJ\SSOC.£lJM 
711 

H"'rr !FE ER,""-T! N 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chair, Committee on 

Science, Space & Technology 

U.S. House of Representatives 

2320 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith: 

727 151

h Street, NW Suite 800 

Washington, DC 20005 

26 June 2018 

I am writing to offer the support of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation of the 

American Space SAFE Management Act. 

The 80+ member companies and organizations of CSF appreciate your and your staff's 

efforts to craft a measured, stepwise approach to "civilianizing" Space Situational 

Awareness, and taking steps to facilitate the development of technologies, standards, 

best practices, and voluntary guidelines for appropriate future space traffic coordination 

efforts. 

This legislation represents a very good next step in the legislative process. Our 

members are continuing to review and provide meaningful input on the bill as it moves 

through Congress. 

We would stress that this legislation, with appropriate minor changes, should be seen as 

a ce_tltog on what is appropriate for Congress to legislate at this time. It lays the 

foundation for focused research and development, consultative program initiation, and 

efforts to enable future coordination activities, as necessary. While it is important to 

define and assign initial roles and responsibilities in the relatively near term, Congress 

cannot effectively anticipate or prejudge how the future of space traffic issues will evolve. 

Therefore, it is not necessary to grant any agency broad authority to craft regulations 

when we have not yet defined the best practices, industry standards, and voluntary 

guidelines that must be shown to be insufficient before regulatory power is granted. 

Thank you for the opportunity to express our views to the Committee on this important 

legislation. 

Yours truly, 

Eric W. StaHmer 

President 

Commercial Spaceflight Federation 

cc: Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member 

Committee on Science, Space 

and Technology 
712 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chairman 

Committee on Science, Space and Technology 

U.S. House of Representatives 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Chainnan Smith, 

June 26,2018 

Bigelow Aerospace (BA) and Bigelow Space Operations (BSO) applaud your efforts on the American 

Space Situational Awarenexs and Framewarkj(>r Entity Management Act (American Space SAFE 

Management Act). Thank you for continuing to work with the commercial industry on important issues 

that are vital to a successful space future. 

BA and BSO are genuinely dedicated to facilitating commercial human spaceflight in low Earth orbit 

on commercial space stations. It is desperately necessary that there is a reliable cadence to access 

commercial platforms. Department of Commerce is appropriately suited to take responsibility of 

Space Situational Awareness services. 

As this nascent industry takes shape, legislation and policy that are supportive of commercial activities 

are critical to its survival. The significance of space activities is higher than ever before, and ensuring 

the safety, sustainshility and stability of U.S. space operations is of the upmost importance. 

Respectfully, 
713 

That concludes my statement. 

And do you want to be recognized? No. 

And we will now proceed with amendments in the order listed in 

the roster, and the first amendment on the roster is a manager’s 

amendment, and I’ll recognize myself to offer the amendment. And 

the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 6226, offered by Mr. Smith of 

Texas, amendment number 002. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and I recognize myself to explain the amendment. 

This amendment represents a good-faith effort to incorporate 

constructive feedback received from Representative Bera and Representative Perlmutter and other stakeholders after the bill was 

noticed for markup. 

This amendment directs the Secretaries of Commerce and Defense, in coordination with relevant agencies, to submit a plan outlining the transition of space situational awareness information 

and services program to the Department of Commerce and how a 

gap in providing SSA information and services will be prevented. 

This amendment clarifies that the Secretary of Commerce may 

leverage existing work force and experience of other Federal agencies. 

The amendment also makes it clear that the policy of the United 

States is to timely develop voluntary civil space traffic coordination 

guidelines, practices, and standards to ensure a safe operating environment and inform the development of a comprehensive space 

traffic management framework. 

Finally, the Secretary of Commerce is directed to report biannually on recommendations to facilitate the development of a comprehensive space traffic management framework. I firmly believe 

this amendment improves and strengthens the policy of the American Space SAFE Management Act. 

And I thank Representatives Bera and Perlmutter for their constructive engagement and negotiation of these policy provisions. It 

is a better bill as a result. 

Is there further discussion? 

The gentleman from California, Mr. Bera, the Ranking Member, 

is recognize for his—— 

Mr. BERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH [continuing]. Comments. 

Mr. BERA. As you’ve already noted, we’ve had multiple hearings 

on the complexity of space and the importance of space traffic management, and so I’m glad that this process continues to move forward. 

As we discussed at the hearing last week in the Subcommittee, 

you know, it still remains to be seen what the best transition looks 

like, but we all agree that there does need to be a transition. And 

I’m glad that the Chairman was able to direct DOD and Commerce 

through the manager’s amendment and improving the bill to come 

back to Congress for a report on what this would look like. 

I think General Hyten said it best in—you know, when he described, you know, if you’re walking on a wing and a wing-walker, 

you don’t let go of one strut until you’re firmly holding the next 
714 

strut. And, you know, let’s make sure have a firm grip on that next 

strut before we let go of this—the current DOD strategy. 

So, again, I thank the Chairman for, you know, accepting some 

of the suggestions that Mr. Perlmutter and I made, and I think it 

does make the bill a better bill. And I’ll be supporting the bill. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Bera. 

And the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter, is recognized. 

I might warn the gentleman there’s nothing about Mars in this 

amendment. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Move to strike the last word. 

Chairman SMITH. And the gentleman’s recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. And I appreciate the 

Chairman’s willingness to work with me and Congressman Bera in 

connection with this bill. I think this is an important bill. Obviously, from the testimony we heard last week from General Hyten, 

Administrator Bridenstine, and Secretary Ross, and we know on 

this Committee that as we continue to launch, as we continue to 

add satellites and CubeSats, as the debris continues to mount, we 

have to have management of the traffic up there. 

And within this bill, we talk about space situational awareness. 

That’s really knowing what is up there and where it is, and that 

would be primarily the Defense Department’s responsibility to pinpoint. And then under the bill to have Commerce working with 

NASA, DOD, and other agencies develop this management plan in 

case of collisions and figuring out who’s in what lane and the like. 

And so one of the things that we’ve done—and I appreciate the 

majority’s willing to work with us in this manager’s amendment is 

to make sure that Commerce has sufficient personnel either 

through NASA’s cooperation or Department of Defense’s cooperation to be able to do this right. 

And so we’ll figure out as we develop this space situational 

awareness and space traffic management, you know, who’s doing 

what, but we have to get busy. And I appreciate the Chairman’s 

taking this bill and moving forward. 

I do want us to continue to visit about this because I think there 

are some other sections we do need to talk about so that they 

aren’t counterproductive, and that would be the section on immunity, which is found on page 9, lines 3 through 11. We ought to talk 

about that some more as the bill proceeds. 

And then also as to the voluntary guidelines because at some 

point there needs to be the ability to enforce who’s in what lane, 

who was negligent, who did what. And it’s not just going to be a 

voluntary kind of a setting I don’t think because I liken it to actual 

traffic management here on Earth, to make sure people know how 

things are being managed and who’s in what lane. 

But I think this is a—really a good approach. I’m prepared to 

support it. And I thank the Chairman for working with us in trying 

to figure out how best to implement this management program. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you, Mr. Perlmutter, for your contributions to the bill through the amendment. And you mentioned 

liability, which we all know is a delicate balance, but we can continue to try to address that as well. 
715 

If there’s no further discussion on the amendment, all in favor, 

say aye. 

Those opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

We’ll now go to what I believe will be the last amendment of the 

day, and this will be an amendment offered by the Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson. She’s recognized 

for that purpose. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment 

at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

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

6226, offered by Ms. Johnson of Texas, amendment number 001. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentlewoman is recognized to explain her 

amendment. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

My amendment is very straightforward. It would direct NASA 

Administrator to enter into an arrangement with the National 

Academies to carry out an assessment of what capabilities are 

needed for the provision of civil Federal Government space situational awareness data, information, and services, as well as what 

capabilities currently exist at Federal agencies to meet these needs. 

The assessment would provide a recommendation to Congress as 

to which agencies should be the lead in delivering the space situational awareness functions. The National Academies would deliver 

this assessment to Congress within 1 year. 

The intent of my amendment is also very straightforward. It is 

intended to give Congress the information it will need to determine 

which government agency should be the lead for the provision of 

civil space situational awareness or SSA. Because we should not 

simply rubberstamp the Trump Administration’s proposal to have 

the Department of Commerce be the lead agency any more than we 

should simply adopt the interagency consensus reached in the 

Obama Administration that FAA should be the lead. 

As was strongly argued by at least one Member of the first of 

last Friday’s hearing on SSA, the one we have held on the topic in 

more than 4 years, the Administration can propose its approach to 

civil SSA, but Congress then needs to do its job and engage in serious oversight, hold hearings in here from a broad array of stakeholders. Only after it has been done—it has done its own work on 

the issue and examined the Administration’s proposals in depth 

can Congress make informed decisions about the best way to proceed. 

This Committee has somehow found the time to hold at least five 

hearings under our Chairman on the search of alien life, an interesting topic to be sure, but with little legislative relevance. At the 

same time, we can’t be bothered to seriously investigate the legislative and policy proposals put forth by the current Administration. 

We’re once again rushing to a markup today without having first 

done our homework and our job as legislators, and so we will once 

again mark up a bill that has received very little serious scrutiny. 

My amendment would allow the rush to be blindly fall in line— 

would slow the rush to the—blindly fall in line behind this Admin-
716 

istration’s plan and instead let us make sure the independent and 

objective analysis of the National Academies. 

Some may say that we can’t afford to wait a year to get the information we need, but I ask why not? The DOD is going to continue 

to provide their SSA services. It is not going to unilaterally walk 

away from that responsibility. We are not risking anything by taking time to do our job as Members of Congress. 

I had planned to offer an amendment that would have assigned 

the lead SSA responsibility to our Nation’s premiere space agency 

NASA to make the point that there are serious alternatives to 

Commerce that need to be considered by Congress. In many ways, 

it makes more sense to assign the role to NASA. NASA already 

works closely with DOD on SSA and on collision avoidance. It has 

a wealth of knowledge and experience and resources that it can 

bring to bear. NASA has demonstrated the ability to garner international support on past issues, and I believe it can do the same 

for SSA and space traffic management because it is trusted as an 

unbiased, neutral agency. 

Some will say that while NASA is the most qualified civil agency 

to do the job, they’re not a regulatory agency. I agree. NASA is not 

a regulatory agency. But as I read the bill, there are no regulatory 

responsibilities defined or mandated in the lead civil agency for 

SSA. But at the end of the day, I’m not prepared to say that NASA 

is the answer even if it appears to be an obviously better choice 

than Commerce. 

We simply do not yet have enough information to make an informed decision. This is why we need the National Academies to 

help us understand these complex issues. We might not agree with 

the Academies’ recommendation, but if in the meantime we are 

also doing our job as a Committee and holding hearings and getting input from experts and stakeholders, we will be far better prepared to legislate in this area after we get the Academies’ assessment. 

And there could be serious consequences if we get this wrong. In 

the past, when Congress has legislated haphazardly and assigned 

brand-new functions to agencies ill-equipped to deal with them, bad 

things have happened. Assigned SSA function to an unprepared 

agency could end up costing the Federal Government a lot of wasted money and time, and we stand up to what is essentially a new 

agency when other better alternatives may already exist. 

In summary, my amendment is really a Science Committee doyour-job amendment, and I urge my colleagues to support it. And 

I thank you and yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

And I’ll recognize myself in opposition to the amendment. 

This amendment would direct the National Academy of Science 

to conduct an assessment and recommend a space traffic management framework. I don’t think we need to wait for another study 

on this topic. Congress has asked and received similar studies. Pursuant to the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act of 

2015, NASA delivered to Congress over 18 months ago a report on, 

quote, ‘‘frameworks for the management of space traffic and orbital 

activities,’’ end quote. 
717 

In addition, the Institute for Defense Analyses did a report, 

which is publicly available, for the Obama Administration in 2016 

evaluating options for civil space situational awareness. It is time 

for us to act. 

As General Hyten and Administrator Bridenstine testified last 

week, time is critical. The number of commercial satellites in space 

are predicted to grow from 1,300 active satellites today to more 

than 10,000 in just the next few years. If we don’t develop a space 

traffic management framework immediately, we risk the safety of 

the space operational environment, so I have to oppose the amendment. 

Is there any further discussion? 

If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by 

Ms. Johnson. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I ask for record vote. 

Chairman SMITH. A recorded vote has been requested, and the 

clerk will call the roll. And let me say we may be leaving the vote 

open for a couple of minutes, too, depending on the result. No, I 

think we’ve got—I take it back. I think we’ve got good representation over here. OK. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith? 

Chairman SMITH. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith votes no. 

Mr. Lucas? 

Mr. LUCAS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lucas votes no. 

Mr. Rohrabacher? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Rohrabacher votes no. 

Mr. Brooks? 

Mr. BROOKS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Brooks votes no. 

Mr. Hultgren? 

Mr. HULTGREN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Hultgren votes no. 

Mr. Posey? 

Mr. POSEY. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Posey votes no. 

Mr. Massie? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Knight? 

Mr. KNIGHT. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Knight votes no. 

Mr. Babin? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mrs. Comstock? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Loudermilk? 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Loudermilk votes no. 

Mr. Abraham? 
718 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Palmer? 

Mr. PALMER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Palmer votes no. 

Mr. Webster? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Biggs? 

Mr. BIGGS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Biggs votes no. 

Mr. Marshall? 

Mr. MARSHALL. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Marshall votes no. 

Mr. Dunn? 

Mr. DUNN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Dunn votes no. 

Mr. Higgins? 

Mr. HIGGINS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Higgins votes no. 

Mr. Norman? 

Mr. NORMAN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Norman votes no. 

Mrs. Lesko? 

Mrs. LESKO. No. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Lesko votes no. 

Ms. Johnson? 

Ms. JOHNSON. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson votes yes. 

Ms. Lofgren? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Lipinski? 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lipinski votes yes. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

Ms. BONAMICI. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Bonamici votes yes. 

Mr. Bera? 

Mr. BERA. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Bera votes no. 

Ms. Esty? 

Ms. ESTY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Esty votes yes. 

Mr. Veasey? 

Mr. VEASEY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Veasey votes yes. 

Mr. Beyer? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Ms. Rosen? 

Ms. ROSEN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Rosen votes yes. 

Mr. Lamb? 

Mr. LAMB. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lamb votes yes. 

Mr. McNerney? 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Yes. 
719 

The CLERK. Mr. McNerney votes yes. 

Mr. Perlmutter? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. My Ranking Member makes a lot of good 

points, but no. 

The CLERK. Mr. Perlmutter votes no. 

Mr. Tonko? 

Mr. TONKO. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Tonko votes yes. 

Mr. Foster? 

Mr. FOSTER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Foster votes yes. 

Mr. Takano? 

Mr. TAKANO. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Takano votes yes. 

Ms. Hanabusa? 

Ms. HANABUSA. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Hanabusa votes yes. 

Mr. Crist? 

Mr. CRIST. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Crist votes yes. 

Chairman SMITH. You got back. Thank you. Do we have some— 

who’s on their way? The clerk will report the vote. 

The CLERK. Mr. Chairman, 13 Members have voted yes, 17 Members have voted no. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. And the amendment is not agreed to. 
720 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY ·1151

h 

Full Committee Roll Call 

Working Quorum: 13 Reporting Quorum: 20 

DATE: June 27,2018 

Bill: H.R. 6226 AMENDMENT NO. 001 

ROLL CALL NO. 1 

Amendment Sponsor: Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) DEFEATED 

MEMBER AYE NO PRESENT NOT VOTING 

1 Mr. SMITH, Chair- TX X 

2 Mr. LUCAS - OK ** X 

3 Mr. ROHRABACHER- CA X 

4 Mr. BROOKS- AL X 

5 Mr. HULTGREN - IL X 

6 Mr. POSEY- FL X 

7 Mr. MASSIE - KY 

8 Mr. WEBER- TX 

9 Mr. KNIGHT- CA X 

10 Mr. BABIN- TX 

11 Mrs. COMSTOCK- VA 

12 Mr. LOUDERMILK- GA X 

13 Mr. ABRAHAM- LA 

14 Mr. PALMER- AL X 

15 Mr. WEBSTER- FL 

16 Mr. BIGGS - AZ X 

17 Mr. MARSHALL - KS X 

18 Mr. DUNN-FL X 

19 Mr. HIGGINS - LA X 

20 Mr. NORMAN - SC X 

21 Mrs. LESKO - AZ X 

22 VACANT 

1 Ms. JOHNSON, Ranking- TX X 

2 Ms. LOFGREN - CA 

3 Mr. LIPINSKI -/L X 

4 Ms. BONAMICI- OR X 

5 Mr. BERA-CA X 

6 Ms. ESTY-CT X 

7 Mr. VEASEY - TX X 

8 Mr. BEYER- VA 

9 Ms. ROSEN - NV X 

10 Mr.LAMB-PA X 

11 Mr. MCNERNEY - CA X 

12 Mr. PERLMUTTER- CO X 

13 Mr. TONKO- NY X 

14 Mr. FOSTER -IL X 

15 Mr. TAKANO- CA X 

16 Ms. HANABUSA- HI X 

17 Mr. CRIST- FL X 

TOTALS 13 17 

** Vice Chair 
721 

If there are no further amendments, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 6226, as amended, to the House with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 6226 to the House, 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman SMITH. Who seeks to be recognized? The gentleman 

from California in the middle of a vote wants to be recognized. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I tried to get your attention before you called 

the vote. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. The gentleman is recognized. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I’ll make this very quick. I’d just like to express my strong support for this bill, H.R. 6226. Just to note that 

I’ve been working on legislation like this for about 20 years, and 

so I’m very gratified by your leadership and the unanimity that we 

have among our colleagues to actually provide a useful nonregulatory approach to dealing with very serious challenges of space debris, space situational awareness, and space traffic coordination. 

This act lays the foundation for developing the technologies that 

will enable private industry and—as well as government and provide the development of the standards and the framework that will 

lead us to the best solutions of these very serious challenges that, 

as I say, for 15 years I’ve been talking about debris, and I’m gratified that we have taken it seriously and that this Administration 

is taking it seriously. 

This is a major step in the right direction that will enable us to 

deal with roadblocks that if we do not deal with these roadblocks, 

we will be prevented from utilizing to its best degree the benefits 

of space for our country and for all mankind. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher, for those constructive comments. 

And the gentlewoman from Texas, the Ranking Member, Ms. 

Johnson, is also recognized for her comments. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

That statement supports why I want us to do our work well, and 

I want to thank Mr. Rohrabacher for making my point. I will not 

object to the passing of this legislation, but I want the record to 

reflect that we have a responsibility to do the work that we were 

sent here to do for the good of the people of the Nation. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you, too, Ms. Johnson. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 6226 to the House, 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

All those opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

H.R. 6227 is ordered reported to the House. I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any necessary technical and 

conforming changes. Without objection, so ordered. 

Before we adjourn, I just want to—this is probably the best turnout we’ve had of Members of this Committee, and I just appreciate 
722 

everybody’s participation and presence. And I also want to especially thank the staff. We had staff on both sides of four Subcommittees involved with these three bills, and for some reason 

Chris Wydler always seems to be in the middle of everything. But 

anyway, we appreciate the work of all the staff on both sides. 

And also, I think this—let me make a rough prediction here that 

when we finish our suspension votes on the floor this afternoon, I 

think the Committee will have successfully taken 33 bills to the 

floor, 30 of which were bipartisan, so it’s a credit to Members of 

this Committee on both sides. 

If there’s no further discussion, that completes our business. This 

concludes the Science Committee markup. Without objection, the 

Committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:19 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 
(723) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 6227, AMENDMENT ROSTER, H.R. 6229, H.R. 6226, 

AMENDMENT ROSTER
724 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOl.XML 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H.R. 

(Origiml Signature of Meml>er) 

To proYide for a coordinated Federal program to accelerate quantum research 

and deYelopment for the economic and national security of the United States. 

IN THE HOUSE O:F' REPRESENTATIVES 

Mr. SMITH of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on __________ _ 

A BILL 

To provide for a coordinated Federal program to accelerate 

quantum research and development for the economic and 

national security of the United States. 

1 Be if enacted by the Senate and House of Rep1·esenta2 tives of the United States of Amm'ica in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION I. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

4 (a) SHORT TITLE.-This Act may be cited as the 

5 "National Quantum Initiative Act". 

6 (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.-

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents. 

Sec. 2. Definitions. 

Sec. 3. Purposes. 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21,2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
725 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOI.XML 

2 

TITI,E I-NATIONAI, Ql'A..'\'TUM ll\'ITL\TIVE 

Sec. 101. National Quantum Initiative Program. 

Sec. 102. National Quantum Coordination Office. 

Sec. 103. Subcommittee on Quantum Information Science. 

Sec. 104. National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee. 

Sec. 105. Sunset. 

TITLJ<J II-NATIONAI, INS1'ITUTE OF STANDARDS AND 

TECHNOLOGY QUAt\lTUM AC'l'IVITIES 

Sec. 201. National Institute of Standards and Technology activities and quantum workshop. 

TITI,E III-NATIONAl, SCIENCE FOUNDATION At'ID ~nJLTIDISCIPLINARY CENTERS !<'OR QUA..l';TUM RESEARCH At"JD EDUCATION 

Sec. 301. Quantum infbrmation seienee research fmd education program. 

Sec. 302. Multidisciplinary Centers for Quantum Research and Education. 

TITI,E IV-DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY RESEARCH A..\lD NATIONAl, 

QUANTUM INFORMATION SCIENCE RBSEARCII CENTERS 

Sec. 401. Quantum Information Science Research program. 

Sec. 402. National Quantum Information Science Research Centers. 

Sec. 403. Spending limitation. 

1 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

2 In this Act, the following definitions apply: 

3 (1) ADVISORY COMlVIITTEE.-The term "Adv.i4 sory Committee" means the National Quantum lni5 tiative Advisory Committee established under section 

6 104(a). 

7 (2) COORDINATION O'F'F'ICE.-The term "Co8 ordination Office" means the National Quantum Co9 ordination Office established under section 102(a). 

lO (3) INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION.-

11 The term "institutions of higher education" has the 

12 meaning given the term in section 101(a) of the 

13 Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. lOOl(a)). 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June21, 2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
726 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOI.XML 

3 

(4) PROGRAM.-The term "Program" means 

2 the National Quantum Initiative Program imple3 mented under section lOl(a). 

4 (5) QUANTUM INFORMA'fiON SCIENCE.-The 

5 term "quantum information science" means the 

6 storage, transmission, manipulation, or measurement 

7 of information that is encoded in systems that can 

8 only be described by the laws of quantum physics. 

9 (6) SuBCOMMI'l''l'EE.-The term "Sub10 committee" means the Subcommittee on Quantum 

11 Information Science of the National Science and 

12 Technology Council established under section 

13 103(a). 

14 SEC. 3. PURPOSES. 

15 The purposes of this Act are to ensure the continued 

16 leadership of the United States in quantum information 

17 science and its technology applications by18 (1) snpporting research, development, dem19 onstration, and application of quantum information 

20 science and technology in order to21 (A) expand the number of researchers, 

22 educators, and students with training in quan23 tum information science and technology to de24 velop a workforce pipeline; 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21, 2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
727 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOI.XML 

4 

(B) promote the development and inclusion 

2 of multidisciplinary curriculum and research op3 portlmities for quantum information science at 

4 the undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral 

5 level; 

6 (C) address basic research knowledge gaps; 

7 (D) promote the further development of fa8 cilities and centers available for quantum infor9 mation science and technology research, testing 

10 and education; and 

11 (E) stimulate research on and promote 

12 more rapid development of quantum-based tech13 nologies; 

14 (2) improving the interagency planning and co15 ordination of Federal research and development of 

16 quantum information science and technology and 

17 maximizing the effectiveness of the Federal Govern18 ment's quantum information science and technology 

19 research and development programs; 

20 (3) promoting collaboration among government, 

21 .F'ederal laboratories, industry, and universities; and 

22 ( 4) promoting the development of standards for 

23 quantum information science and technology seen24 rity. 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21, 2018 (3:17p.m.} 

(689486123} 
728 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOI.XML 

5 

TITLE I-NATIONAL QUANTUM 

2 INITIATIVE 

3 SEC. 101. NATIONAL QUANTUM INITIATIVE PROGRAM. 

4 The President shall implement a 10-year National 

5 Quantum Initiative Program. In carrying out the Pro6 gram, the President shall, acting through appropriate 

7 Federal agencies, eouneils, working groups, subeommit8 tees, and the Coordination Office9 (1) establish the goals, priorities, and metrics 

10 for a 10-year plan to accelerate development of 

11 quantum information science and technology applica12 tions in the United States; 

13 (2) invest in fundamental Federal quantum in14 formation science and technology research, develop15 ment, demonstration, and other aetivities to achieve 

16 the goals established in paragraph (1); 

17 (3) invest in activities to develop a quantum in18 formation science and technology workforce pipeline; 

19 ( 4) provide for interagency coordination of Fed20 eral quantum information science and technology re21 search, development, demonstration, and other ac22 tivities undertaken pursuant to the Program; 

23 ( 5) partner ·with industry and academia to le24 verage knowledge and resources; and 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21,2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
729 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOI.XML 

6 

( 6) leverage existing Federal investments effi2 ciently to advance Program goals and objectives. 

3 SEC. 102. NATIONAL QUANTUM COORDINATION OFFICE. 

4 (a) ESTABI,ISHME:\'T.-The President shall establish 

5 a National Quantum Coordination Office, which shall 

6 have7 (1) a Director appointed by the Director of the 

8 Office of Science and Technology Policy, in consulta9 tion with the Secretary of Commerce, the Director 

10 of the National Science Foundation, and the Sec11 retary of Energy; and 

12 (2) staff that shall be comprised of employees 

13 detailed from the Federal agencies that are members 

14 of the Subcommittee. 

15 (b) RESPONSIBILITIES.-The Coordination Office 

16 shall17 (1) provide technical and administrative support 

18 to19 (A) the Subcommittee; and 

20 (B) the Advisory Committee; 

21 (2) oversee interagency coordination of the Pro22 gram, including encouraging and supporting joint 

23 agency solicitation and selection of applications for 

24 funding of projects under the Program; 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21,2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
730 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOI.XML 

7 

1 (3) serve as the point of contact on Federal ci2 vilian quantum information science and technology 

3 activities for Government organizations, academia, 

4 industry, professional societies, ·State governments, 

5 and others to exchange technical and programmatic 

6 information; 

7 ( 4) ensure coordination between the Multidisei8 plinary Centers for Quantum Research and Edu9 cation established under section 302(b) and the Na1 0 tiona! Quantum Information Science Research Cen11 ters established under section 402(a); 

12 (5) conduct public outreach, including dissemi13 nation of findings and recommendations of the Advi14 sory Committee, as appropriate; and 

15 (6) promote access to and early application of 

16 the technologies, innovations, and expertise derived 

17 from Program activities to agency missions and sys18 terns across the Federal Government, and to United 

19 States industry, including startup companies. 

20 (c) FuNDING.-l;unds necessary to carry out the ac21 tivities of the Coordination Office shall be made available 

22 each fiscal year by the participating agencies of the Sub23 committee, as determined by the Director of the Office 

24 of Science and Technology Policy. 

g:IVHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21,2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
731 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT _OO!.XML 

8 

1 SEC. 103. SUBCOMMI'ITEE ON QUANTUM INFORMATION 

2 SCIENCE. 

3 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.-The President shall establish, 

4 through the National Science and Technology Council, a 

5 Subcommittee on Quantum Information Science. 

6 (b) MEMBERSHIP.-The Subcommittee shall m7 elude8 (1) the National Institute of Standards and 

9 Technology; 

10 (2) the National Science Foundation; 

11 (3) the Department of Energy; 

12 (4) the National Aeronautics and Space Admin13 istration; 

14 (5) the Department of Defense; 

15 (6) the Office of the Director of National Intel16 ligence; 

17 (7) the Office of Management and Budget; 

18 (8) the Office of Science and Technology Policy; 

19 and 

20 (9) any other Federal agency as considered ap21 propriate by the President. 

22 (c) CHAIRS.-The Subcommittee shall be jointly 

23 chaired by the Director of the National Institute of Stand24 ards and Technology, the Director of the National Science 

25 Foundation, and the Secretary of Energy. 

26 (d) RESPONSIBILITIES.-The Subcommittee shallg:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21.2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
732 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOI.XML 

9 

1 (1) coordinate the quantum information science 

2 and technology research and education activities and 

3 programs of the Federal ag·encies; 

4 (2) establish g-oals and priorities of the ProS gram, based on identified knowledge and workforce 

6 gaps and other national needs; 

7 (3) assess and recommend Federal infrastruc8 ture needs to support the Program; and 

9 ( 4) evaluate opportunities for international colO operation with strategic allies on research and dcvel11 opment in quantum information science and tech12 nology. 

13 (e) STRATEGIC Pl..AN.-Not later than 1 year after 

14 the date of enactment of this Act, the Subcommittee shall 

15 develop a 5-year strategic plan, and 6 years after enact16 mcnt of the Act develop an additional 5-year strategic 

17 plan, with periodic updates as appropriate to guide the 

18 activities of the Program, meet the goals, priorities, and 

19 anticipated outcomes of the participating agencies. 

20 {f) REPORTS.-The Chairs of the Subcommittee shall 

21 submit to the President, the Advisory Committee, the 

22 Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the 

23 House of Representatives, the Committee on Commerce, 

24 Scienee, and Transportation and the Committee on En25 ergy and Natural Resources of the Senate, and other apg:\VHLC\0621181062118. 191.xml 

June 21, 2018 (3:17 p.m.) 

(689486123) 
733 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOI.XML 

10 

1 propriate committees of Congress the strategic plans de2 veloped under subsection (e) and any updates to such 

3 plans. 

4 SEC. 104. NATIONAL QUANTUM INITIATIVE ADVISORY COM5 MITTEE. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.-The President shall establish a 

7 National Quantum Initiative Advisory Committee. 

8 (b) QUALIFICATIONS.-The Advisory Committee es9 tablished by the President under subsection (a) shall con10 sist of members from industry, academic institutions, and 

11 Federal laboratories. The President shall appoint mem12 bers to the Advisory Committee who are qualified to pro13 vide advice and information on quantum information 

14 science and technology research, development, demonstra15 tions, education, technology transfer, commercial applica16 tion, or national security and economic concerns. 

17 (c) MEMBERSHIP CONSIDE&'\TION.-In selecting an 

18 Advisory Committee, the President may seek and give con19 sideration to recommendations from the Congress, indus20 try, the scientific community (including the National 

21 Academy of Sciences, scientific professional societies, and 

22 academia), the defense community, and other appropriate 

23 organizations. 

24 (d) DUTIES.-The Advisory Committee shall advise 

25 the President and the Subcommittee and make recg:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21,2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
734 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOI.XML 

11 

1 ommendations that shall be considered in reviewing and 

2 revising the Program. The Advisory Committee shall pro3 vide the President and the Subcommittee with an inde4 pendent assessment of5 (1) trends and developments in quantum infor6 mation science and technology; 

7 (2) progress made in implementing the Pro8 gram; 

9 (3) whether the Program activities, priorities, 

10 and technical goals developed by the Subcommittee 

11 are helping to maintain United States leadership in 

12 quantum information science and technology; 

13 ( 4) the management, coordination, implementa14 tion, and activities of the Program; 

15 ( 5) the need to revise the ProgTam; 

16 (6) whether or not there are opportunities for 

17 international cooperation with strategic allies on re18 search and development in quantum information 

19 science and technology; and 

20 (7) whether national security, societal, eco21 nomic, legal, and workforce concerns are adequately 

22 addressed by the Program. 

23 (e) REPOR'l'S.-The Advisory Committee shall report, 

24 not less frequently than once every 2 years, to the Presi25 dent on the assessments required under subsection (d) and 

g:IVHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21,2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
735 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOI.XML 

12 

1 any recommendations to improve the Program. The first 

2 report under this subsection shall be submitted not later 

3 than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act. 

4 'rhe Director of the Office of Science and 'l'echnology Pol5 icy shall transmit a copy of each report under this sub6 section to the Committee on Science, Space, and Tech7 nology of the House of Representatives, the Committee on 

8 Commerce, Science, and Technology of the Senate, the 

9 Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Sen10 ate, and other appropriate committees of the Congress. 

11 (f) TRAVEl, EXPENSI<JS OF NON-FI<JDI<JRAL MKM12 BI<JRS.-Non-Federal members of the Advisory Committee, 

13 while attending meetings of the Advisory Committee or 

14 while otherwise serving at the request of the head of the 

15 Advisory Committee away from their homes or regular 

16 places of business, may be allowed travel expenses, includ17 ing per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by sec18 tion 5703 of title 5, United States Code, for indiYidnals 

19 in the Government serving without pay. Nothing in this 

20 subsection shall be construed to prohibit members of the 

21 Advisory Committee who are officers or employees of the 

22 United States from being allowed travel expenses, includ23 ing per diem in lieu of subsistence, in accordance with ex24 isting law. 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.1 91.xml 

June 21,2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
736 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QU ANT_OO l.XML 

13 

(g·) EXEi\IPTION.-The Advisory Committee shall be 

2 exempt from section 14 of the Federal Advisory Com3 mittee Act (5 U.S.C. App.). 

4 SEC. 105. SUNSET. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.-Except as provided for in sub6 seetion (b), the authority to carry out sections 101, 102, 

7 103, and 104 shall terminate on the date that is 11 years 

8 after the date of enactment of this Act. 

9 (b) EXTENSION.-The President may continue the 

10 activities under such sections if the President determines 

11 that such activities are necessary to meet national eco12 nomic or national security needs. 

13 TITLE II-NATIONAL INSTITUTE 

14 OF STANDARDS AND TECH15 NOLOGY QUANTUM ACTIVI16 TIES 

17 SEC. 201. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECH18 NOLOGY ACTIVITIES AND QUANTUM WORK19 SHOP. 

20 (a) NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STfu.'JDARDS AND 

21 1'ECHNOLOGY ACTIVITIES.-As part of the ProgTam de22 scribed in title I, the Director of the National Institute 

23 of Standards and Technology shall24 (1) continue to support and expand basic qnan25 tum information science and technology research 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21, 201 B (3:17 p.m.) 

(689486123) 
737 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOl.XML 

14 

and development of measurement and standards in2 frastructure necessary to advance commercial devel3 opment of quantum applications; 

4 (2) use its existing programs, in collaboration 

5 with other agencies, as appropriate, to train sci6 entists m quantum information science and tech7 nology to increase participation in the quantum 

8 fields; 

9 (3) establish or expand collaborative ventures or 

10 consmtia with other public or private sector entities, 

11 including academia, National Laboratories, and in12 dustry for the purpose of advancing the field of 

13 quantum information science and engineering; and 

14 ( 4) have the authority to enter into and per15 form sueh contracts, including cooperative research 

16 and deYelopment arrangements and grants and coop17 erative agreements or other transactions, as may be 

18 necessary in the eonduet of the work of the Institute 

19 and on such terms as the Director considers appro20 priate, in furtherance of the purposes of this Act. 

21 (b) QUAi'\TTUM WORKSHOP.-

22 (1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 1 year after 

23 the date of enactment of this Act, the Director of 

24 the National Institute of Standards and Technology 

25 shall convene a workshop of stakeholders to discuss 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21,2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
738 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT _OOI.XML 

15 

the future measurement, standards, cyberseeurity, 

2 and other appropriate needs for supporting the de3 velopment of a robust quantum information science 

4 and technology industry in the United States. 'l'he 

5 goals of the workshop shall be to--

6 (A) assess the current research on the 

7 issues described in this paragraph; 

8 (B) evaluate the research gaps relating to 

9 sueh issues; and 

10 (C) provide recommendations on how the 

11 National Institute of Standards and Technology 

12 and the ProgTam can address the research 

13 needs identified. 

14 (2) REPORT TO CONGRESS.-Not later than 2 

15 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

16 Director of the National Institute of Standards and 

17 Technology shall transmit to the Committee on 

18 Science, Spaee, and Technology of the House of 

19 Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, 

20 Science, and Transportation of the Senate a sum21 mary report containing the findings of the workshop 

22 convened under this section. 

23 (c) l<~UNDING.-The Secretary of Commerce shall de24 Yote $400,000,000 to carry out this section, which shall 

25 include $80,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2019 through 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21. 2018 (3:17 p.m.) 

(689486123) 
739 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOl.XML 

16 

1 2023, subject to the availability of appropriations, to come 

2 from amounts made available for the National Institute 

3 of Standards and Technology. This section shall be carried 

4 out using funds othervvise appropriated by law after the 

5 date of enactment of this Act. 

6 TITLE III-NATIONAL 

7 

8 

9 

10 

SCIENCE 

FOUNDATION AND MULTIDISCIPLINARY CENTERS FOR 

QUANTUM RESEARCH AND 

EDUCATION 

11 SEC. 301. QUANTUM INFORMATION SCIENCE RESEARCH 

12 AND EDUCATION PROGRAM. 

13 (a) IN GENERAL.-The Director of the National 

14 Science Foundation shall carry out a basic research and 

15 edueation progTam on quantum information seience and 

16 engineering·. 

17 (b) PROGRAJ.VI COMPONEN'l'S.-ln carrying out the 

I 8 program required under subsection (a), the Director of the 

19 National Science Foundation shall carry out activities that 

20 continue to support basic interdisciplinary quantum infor21 mation science and engineering research, and support 

22 human resources development in all aspects of quantum 

23 information science and engineering. Such activities shall 

24 includeg:\VHLC\0621181062118.191.xml 

June 21. 2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
740 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCffiNCE\QUANT_OOI.XML 

17 

(1) using the existing programs of the National 

2 Science Foundation, in collaboration vvith other Fed3 era! agencies, as appropriate, to4 (A) improve the teaching and learning of 

5 quantum information science and engineering 

6 at the undergraduate, graduate, and post7 graduate levels; and 

8 (B) increase participation in the quantum 

9 fields, including by individuals identified in sec10 tions 33 and 34 of the Science and Engineering 

11 Equal Opportunities Act ( 42 U.S.C. 1885a; 42 

12 u.s.c. 1885b); 

13 (2) formulating goals for quantum information 

14 science and engineering research and education ac15 tivities to be supported by the National Science 

16 Foundation; 

17 (3) leveraging the collective body of knowledg·e 

18 from existing quantum information science and engi19 neering research and education activities; 

20 ( 4) coordinating research efforts funded 

21 through existing programs across the directorates of 

22 the National Science Foundation; and 

23 (5) engaging with other l<,ederal agencies, re24 search communities, and potential users of informa25 tion produced under this section. 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21, 2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
741 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOl.XML 

18 

SEC. 302. MULTIDISCIPLINARY CENTERS FOR QUANTUM 

2 RESEARCH AND EDUCATION. 

3 (a) MULTIDISCIPLINARY CENTERS FOR QUANTUM 

4 RESEARCH A.t'\TD EDUCATION.-

5 (1) IN GENERAh-The Director of the National 

6 Science Foundation, in consultation with other Fed7 era! agencies as appropriate, shall award grants to 

8 institutions of higher education or eligible nonprofit 

9 organizations (or consortia thereof) to establish up 

10 to 5 .Multidisciplinary Centers for Quantum Re11 search and Education. 

12 (2) COLLABORATIONS.-A collaboration receiv13 ing an award under this subsection may include in14 stitutions of higher education, eligible nonprofit or15 ganizations, and private sector entities. 

16 (3) PURPOSE.-The purpose of the Centers 

17 shall be to conduct basic research and education ac18 tivities in support of the goals and priorities of the 

19 Program as determined in title I, to20 (A) continue to advance quantum informa21 tion science and engineering; 

22 (B) support curriculum and workforce de23 velopment in quantum information science and 

24 engineering; and 

25 (C) foster innovation by bringing industry 

26 perspectives to quantum research and workforce 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21, 2018 (3:17 p.m.) 

(689486123) 
742 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOl.XML 

19 

1 development, including by leveraging industry 

2 resources and research capacity. 

3 ( 4) HEQUIREMENTS.-An institution of higher 

4 education or an eligible nonprofit organization (or a 

5 consortium thereof) seeking funding under this sec6 tion shall submit an application to the Director at 

7 such time, in such manner, and containing such in8 formation as the Director may require. The applica9 tion shall include, at a minimum, a description of10 (A) how the Center will work with other 

11 research institutions and industry partners to 

12 leverage expertise in quantum science, edu13 cation and curriculum development, and tech14 nology transfer; 

15 (B) how the Center will promote active col16 laboration among· researchers in multiple dis17 ciplines involved in quantum research including 

18 physics, engineering, mathematics, computer 

19 science, chemistry, and material science; 

20 (C) how the Center will support long-term 

21 and short-term workforce development in the 

22 quantum field; 

23 (D) how the Center can support an innova24 tion ecosystem to work with industry to trans25 late Center research into applications; and 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21, 2018 (3:17 p.m.) 

(689486123) 
743 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOI.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

20 

(E) a long-term plan to become self-sustaining after the expiration of Foundation support. 

(5) SELECTION ~"JD DURATION.-

(A) IN GENERAL.-The Centers selected 

and established under this section are authorized to carry out activities for a period of 5 

years. 

(B) REAPPLICATION.-An awardee may 

10 reapply for an additional, subsequent period of 

11 5 years on a competitive, merit-reviewed basis. 

12 (C) TERMINATION.-Consistent with the 

13 existing authorities of the Foundation, the Di14 rector of the National Science Foundation may 

15 terminate an undcrperforming Center for cause 

16 during the performance period. 

17 (6) FUNDING.-The Director of the National 

18 Science Foundation shall devote $250,000,000 to 

19 carry out this section, which shall include 

20 $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2019 through 

21 2023, subject to the availability of appropriations, to 

22 come from amounts made available for Research and 

23 Related Activities and Education and Human Re24 sources. This section shall be carried out using 

g:\VHLC\06211 8106211 8.191.xml 

June 21,2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
744 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\SCJENCE\QUANT_OO!.XML 

21 

1 funds otherwise appropriated by law after the date 

2 of enactment of this Act. 

3 (b) GRADUATE TRAINEESHIPS.-The Director of the 

4 National Science Poundation may establish a program to 

5 provide traineeships to graduate students at institutions 

6 of higher education within the United States who are citi7 zens of the United States and who choose to pursue mas8 ters or doctoral degrees in quantum information science. 

9 TITLE IV-DEPARTMENT OF EN10 ERGY RESEARCH AND NA11 TIONAL QUANTUM INFORMA12 TION SCIENCE RESEARCH 

13 CENTERS 

14 SEC. 401. QUANTUM INFORMATION SCIENCE RESEARCH 

15 PROGRAM. 

16 (a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary of Energy shall 

17 carry out a basic research progTam on quantum informa18 tion science. 

19 (b) PROGRAiYI COMPONENTS.-ln carrying out the 

20 program required under subsection (a), the Secretary 

21 shall22 (1) formulate goals for quantum information 

23 science research to be supported by the Department 

24 of Eneq,'Y; 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21, 2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
745 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_OOI.XML 

22 

(2) leverage the collective body of knowledge 

2 from existing quantum information science research; 

3 (3) coordinate research efforts funded through 

4 existing programs across the Office of Science; and 

5 ( 4) engag·e with other l<_,ederal agencies, re6 search communities, and potential users of informa7 tion produced under this section. 

8 SEC. 402. NATIONAL QUANTUM INFORMATION SCIENCE RE9 SEARCH CENTERS. 

10 (a) IN GENERAlo.-The Secretary of Energy shall en11 sure that the Office of Science carries out a program, in 

12 consultation with other l<"'ederal agencies, as appropriate, 

13 to establish and operate up to 5 National Quantum Infor14 mation Science Research Centers to conduct basic re15 search to accelerate scientific breakthroughs in quantum 

16 information science and technology and to support re17 search conducted under section 401. Such centers shall 

18 b<" establi>:hed through a competitive, merit-reviewed proc19 ess, and consider applications from National 1-'aboratories, 

20 institutions of higher education, research centers, multi21 institutional collaborations, and other appropriate entities. 

22 (b) COLLABORATIONS.-A collaboration receiving an 

23 award under this subsection may include multiple types 

24 of research institutions and priYate sector entities. 

g:\VHLC\0621 18\0621 18.191 .xml 

June 21. 2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
746 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT _00 l.XML 

23 

1 (c) REQUIREMENTS.-To the maximum extent prac2 ticable, the Centers developed, constructed, operated, or 

3 maintained under this section shall serve the needs of the 

4 Department of Energy, industry, the academic commu5 nity, and other relevant entities to create and develop 

6 processes for the purpose of advancing basic research in 

7 quantum information science and improving the eompeti8 tiveness of the United States. 

9 (d) COORDINATION.-The Secretary shall ensure the 

I 0 coordination of, and avoid unnecessary duplication of, the 

11 activities of each Center vvith the activities of12 (1) other research entities of the Department, 

13 including the Nanoscale Scienee Researeh Centers, 

14 the Energy B'rontier Research Centers, and the En15 ergy Innovation Hubs; and 

16 (2) industry. 

17 (e) SELEC'riON Al~D DURATION.-

18 (1) IN GENERAL.-The centers selected and es19 tablished under this seetion are authorized to earry 

20 out aetivities for a period of 5 years. 

21 (2) l{EAPPLICATION.-An awardee may reapply 

22 for an additional, subsequent period of 5 years on a 

23 competitive, merit-reviewed basis. 

24 (3) TERl\UNATION.-Consistent with the exist25 ing authorities of the Department, the Secretary 

g:\VHLCI062118\062118.191.xmt 

June 21,2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
747 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SC!ENCE\QUANT_OO!.XML 

24 

1 may terminate an underperforming Center for cause 

2 during the performance period. 

3 (f) 1<-,UNDING.-'l'he Secretary of Energy shall devote 

4 $625,000,000 to carry out this section, which shall include 

5 $125,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2019 through 2023, 

6 subject to the availability of appropriations, to come from 

7 amounts made available for the Office of Science. This 

8 section shall be carried out using funds otherwise appro9 priated by law after the date of enactment of this Act. 

10 SEC. 403. SPENDING LIMITATION. 

11 No additional funds are authorized to be appro12 priated to carry out this Act and the amendments made 

13 by this Act, and this Act and such amendments shall be 

14 carried out using amounts otherwise available for such 

15 purpose. 

g:\VHLC\062118\062118.191.xml 

June 21, 2018 (3:17p.m.) 

(689486123) 
748 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\QUANT_002.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 

OFFERED BY MR. HULTGREN OF ILLINOIS 

Page 7, line 14, strike "and". 

Page 7, line 19, strike the period and insert"; and". 

Page 7, after line 19, insert the following: 

1 (7) promote access, through appropriate Gov2 ernment agencies, to existing quantum computing 

3 and communication systems developed by industry, 

4 academia, and Federal laboratories to the general 

5 user community in pursuit of discovery of the new 

6 applications of such systems. 

g:\VHLC\062518\062518.202.xml 

June 25,2018 (2:42p.m.} 

(70047811) 
749 

G:\M\!5\ROHRABIROHRAB_057.XML 

.AMENDMENT TO H.R. 

OFFERED BY MR. ROHRABACHER OF CALIFORNIA 

At the end of the bill add the following (and update 

the table of contents accordingly): 

1 TITLE V-ADMINISTRATIVE 

2 PROVISIONS 

3 SEC. 501. NATIONAL NANOTECHNOLOGY PROGRAM TRANSI· 

4 TION. 

5 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds the following: 

6 (1) Since the passage of the 21st Century 

7 Nanotechnology Research and Development Act in 

8 2003, the National Nanotechnology Initiative (re9 ferred to in this section as "NNI") has helped make 

10 the United States the global leader in nanotechnol11 ogy. 

12 (2) From fiscal year 2001 through fiscal year 

13 2015, the Federal Government invested approxi14 mately $20.9 billion in nanoscale science, engineerIS ing, and technology through the NNI. 

16 (3) After 15 years of the NNI, Federal agencies 

17 have well established nanotechnology research and 

18 regulatory activities. 

g:\VHLC\0625181062518.290.xml 

June 25, 201 B (4:49 p.m.) 

(70053111) 
750 

G:\M\15\ROHRAB\ROHRAB_057.XML 

2 

1 ( 4) NNI has helped enabled future United 

2 States leadership in quantum infonnation science by 

3 supporting research that has been vital to the devel4 opment of quantum technologies. 

5 (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-It is the sense of Con6 gress that7 (1) the United States should continue to sup8 port nanotechnology research and development; and 

9 (2) the F'ederal Government should continue 

10 successful nanotechnology activities. 

11 (c) TRA..."l"SITION.-Not later than 18 months after the 

12 date of enactment of this Act, the Directm· of the Offiee 

13 of Science and Technology Policy shall submit to Congress 

14 a plan to continue research in nanotechnology while 

15 transitioning the duties and activities of the National 

16 Nanotechnology Program and the National Nanotechnol17 ogy Coordination Office, established in sections 2 and 3 

18 of the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Devel19 opment Act (15 U.S.C. 7501; 15 U.S.C. 7502), to the ap20 propriate Federal agencies and offices. 

21 (d) SUNSET OF 21ST CENTURY NANOTECHNOLOGY 

22 RESEARCH At"l"D DE~VELOPMENT AC'I' PROVISIONS.-

23 (1) IN GENERAL.-The 21st Century Nanotech24 nology Research and Development Act (15 U.S.C. 

g:IVHLC\062518\062518.290.xml 

June 25, 2018 (4:49p.m.) 

(70053111) 
751 

G:\M\15\ROHRAB\ROHRAB_057.XML 

3 

7501 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 

2 following: 

3 "SEC. 11. SUNSET. 

4 "The authority to carry out sections 2 through 5 shall 

5 terminate on the date that is 2 years after the date of 

6 enactment of the National Quantum Initiative Act.". 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

g:\VHLC\062518\06251 8.290.xml 

June 25, 2018 (4:49p.m.) 

(2) CONPORl\IING AMENDMENTS.-

(A) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE PROGRAMS.-Section 7(a)(1) of the 21st Century 

Nanotechnology Research and Development Act 

(15 U.S.C. 7506(a)(l)) is amended by striking 

"as part of the Program activities under section 

2(b)(7),". 

(B) ADDITIONAL CENTERS.-Scction 9 of 

the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and 

Development Act (15 U.S.C. 7508) is amended 

by striking "The Program" each place it appears and inserting "The President". 

(C) EFF'ECTIVE DATE.-The amendments 

made by this paragraph shall take effect on the 

date that is 2 years after the date of enactment 

of this Act. 

(70053111) 
752 

G:\M\15\FOSTER\FOSTER_IIO.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. ----

OFFERED BY MR. FOSTER OF ILLINOIS 

Strike section 403 of the bill. 

g:\ VHLC\062218\062218.297 .xml 

June 22, 2018 (5:26p.m.) 

(70035811) 
753 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\NIST _2018_005 .XML 

l15TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H.R. 

(Original Signature of Member) 

'l'o authorize the programs of the National Institute of Standards and 

Trchnology, and for otht>r purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

M. introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on 

A BILL 

To authorize the programs of the National Institute of 

Standards and Technology, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives qfthe United States of Ame1·ica in Congress nssembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "National Institute of 

5 Standards and Technology Reauthorization Act of 2018". 

6 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

7 (a) .B'ISCAJJ YEAR 2018.-

8 (1) IN GENERAL.-There are authorized to be 

9 appropriated to the Secretary of Commerce 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.175.xml 

June 22, 2018 (2:03p.m.) 

(699277110) 
754 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\NIST_2018_005.XML 

2 

$1,198,500,000 for the National Institute of Stand2 ards and Technology for fiscal year 2018. 

3 (2) SPECIFIC ALLOCATIONS.-Of the amount 

4 authorized by paragraph (1)-

5 (A) $724,500,000 shall be for scientific 

6 and technical research and services laboratory 

7 activities; 

8 (B) $319,000,000 shall be for the con9 struction and maintenance of facilities; and 

10 (C) $155,000,000 shall be for industrial 

11 technology services activities, of which 

12 $140,000,000 shall be for the Manufacturing 

13 Extension Partnership program under sections 

14 25 and 26 of the National Institute of Stand15 ards and 'l'echnology Act (15 U.S.C. 278k and 

16 278I) and $15,000,000 shall be for the Net17 work for Manufacturing Innovation Program 

18 under section 34 of the National Institute of 

19 Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 

20 278s). 

21 (b) FISCAl, YEAR 2019.-

22 (1) IN GENERAL.-There are authorized to be 

23 appropriated to the Secretary of Commerce 

24 $1,115,000,000 for the National Institute of Stand25 ards and Technology for fiscal year 2019. 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.175.xml 

June 22, 2018 {2:03 p.m.) 

{699277110) 
755 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCffiNCE\NIST_2018_005.XML 

3 

(2) SPECH'IC AUJOCATIONS.-Of the amount 

2 authorized by paragraph (1)-

3 (A) $850,000,000 shall be for scientific 

4 and technical research and services laboratory 

5 activities, of which6 (i) $109,900,000 shall be for the ad7 vanced communications, networks, and sci8 entific data systems mission area; 

9 (ii) $103,200,000 shall be for the 

10 cybersecurity and privacy mission area; 

11 (iii) $234,000,000 shall be for the 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.17S.xml 

June 22, 2018 (2:03 p.m.) 

fundamental measurement, quantum 

science and measurement dissemination 

mission area; and 

(iv) $89,800,000 shall be for the 

ph;ysical infrastructure and resilience mission area; 

(B) $120,000,000 shall be for the construetion and maintenance of facilities; and 

(C) $145,000,000 shall be for industrial 

technology services activities, of which-

(i) $140,000,000 shall be for the 

Manufacturing Extension Partnership program under sections 25 and 26 of the National Institute of Standards and Tech-

(699277110) 
756 

G:\CMrE\SC\15\SCIENCE\NIST_2018_005.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

4 

nology Act (15 U.S.C. 278k and 278I); 

and 

(ii) $5,000,000 shall be for the Network for Manufacturing Innovation Program under section ~~4 of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act 

(15 U.S.C. 278s). 

8 SEC. 3. QUANTUM INFORMATION SCIENCE. 

9 (a) RESEARCH ACTIVITIES AND ENGAGEMENT.-The 

10 Secretary, acting through the Director, shall11 (1) continue to support and expand basic quan12 tum information science and technology research 

13 and development of measurement and standards in14 frastructure necessary to advance commercial devel15 opment of quantum applications; 

16 (2) use the progTams of the Institute, in col17 laboration with other relevant Pederal agencies, as 

18 appropriate, to train scientists in quantum informa19 tion science and technology to increase participation 

20 in the quantum fields; 

21 (3) establish or expand collaborative ventures or 

22 consortia with other public or private sector entities, 

23 including other Pcderal agencies engaged in quan24 tum information science research and development, 

25 institutions of higher education, National Laborag:\VHLC\0622181062218.175.xml 

June 22, 2018 (2:03 p.m.) 

(699277110) 
757 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\NIST_2018_005.XML 

5 

tories, and industry, for the purpose of advancing 

2 the field of quantum information science and engi3 neering·; and 

4 ( 4) have the authority to enter into and per5 form such contracts on such terms as the Secretary, 

6 acting through the Director, considers appropriate, 

7 including cooperative research and development ar8 rangements and grants and cooperative agreements 

9 or other transactions, as may be necessary in the 

10 conduct of the work of the Institute with respect to 

11 quantum information science and technology. 

12 (b) QUAl'<TUMWORKSHOP.-

13 (1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 1 year after 

14 the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary, 

15 acting through the Director, shall convene a work16 shop of stakeholders to discuss the future measure17 ment, standards, cybersecurity, and other issues that 

18 relate to development of quantum information 

19 science in the United States. The goals of the work20 shop shall bt,'-

21 (A) assessment of the Institute's quantum 

22 information science and technology research 

23 work, including areas that may need additional 

24 Institute investment in order to support develg:\VHLC\062218\062218.175.xml 

June 22, 2018 (2:03p.m.) 

(699277110) 
758 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\NIST _2018 _ _()05.XML 

6 

1 opment of quantum information sCience and 

2 technology in the United States; and 

3 (B) consideration of recommendations and 

4 priority issues for the Institute's participation 

5 in the proposed National Quantum Initiative 

6 Program. 

7 (2) REPORT TO CONGRESS.-Not later than 2 

8 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

9 Secretary, acting through the Director, shall trans10 mit to the Committee on Science, Space, and Tech11 nology and the Committee on Appropriations of the 

12 House of Representatives and the Committee on 

13 Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the 

14 Committee on Appropriations of the Senate a sumIS mary report containing the findings of the workshop 

16 convened under this subsection. 

17 (c) :F'UNDING.-The Secretary of Commerce shall de18 Yote $80,000,000 to carry out this section for fiscal year 

19 2019, subject to the availability of appropriations, to come 

20 from amounts made available pursuant to section 

21 2(b)2(A)(iii) of this Act. This seetion shall be carried out 

22 using funds otherwise appropriated by law after the date 

23 of enactment of this Act. 

g:\VHLC\062218\06221 B.175.xml 

June 22, 201 B (2:03 p.m.) 

(699277110) 
759 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\NIST_2018_005.XML 

7 

1 SEC. 4. CYBERSECURITY. 

2 (a) AsSISTA...""CE TO FEDERAL AGENCIES.-The Sec3 retary, acting through the Director, shall enhance and cx4 pand the Institute's guidance and assistance to Federal 

5 agencies to help such agencies effectively use the Framc6 work, including by providing technical guidance and edu7 cation and training of8 (1) agency staff responsible for cybersecurity, 

9 consultative services, and other assistance at such 

10 agencies; and 

11 (2) individual inspectors general and staff of 

12 such agencies who are responsible for the annual 

13 independent evaluation required under section 3555 

14 of title 44, United States Code. 

15 (b) REPOR'r.-Not later than 12 months after the 

16 date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall sub17 mit to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

18 of the House of RepresentatiYes and the Committee on 

19 Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a 

20 report describing the implementation of the activities de21 scribed in this section in as much detail as possible, includ22 ing the identification of Federal agencies assisted pursu23 ant to subsection (a) and the t:n>es of consultative services, 

24 education, guidance, assistance, and training provided to 

25 such agencies and inspectors general of such agencies pur26 suant to such subsection. 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.175.xml 

June 22, 2018 (2:03 p.m.) 

(69927711 0) 
760 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\NIST_2018_005.XML 

8 

1 (c) RI<JSEARCH.-The Secretary, acting through the 

2 Director, shall expand the fundamental and applied re3 search carried out by the Institute to address key ques4 tions relating the measurement of privacy, security, and 

5 vulnerability of software tools and communications net6 works, including through7 (1) the development of research and engineering 

8 capabilities to provide practical solutions, including 

9 measurement techniques and engineering toolkits, to 

10 solve cybersecurity challenges such as human fac11 tors, identity management, network security, pn12 vacy, and software; 

13 (2) investment in tools to help private and pub14 lie sector organizations measure their cybersecurity, 

15 manage their risks and ensure workforce prepared16 ness for new cybersecurity challenges; and 

17 (3) investment in programs to prepare the 

18 United States with strong cybersecurity and 

19 encryption technologies to apply to emerging tech20 nologies such as artificial intelligence, the internet of 

21 things, and quantum computing. 

22 (d) AtT'l'HORITY.-The Secretary, acting through the 

23 Director, shall have the authority to enter into and per24 form such contracts on such terms as the Secretary con25 siders to be appropriate, including cooperative research 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.175.xml 

June 22, 2018 (2:03 p.m.) 

(699277110) 
761 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\SCIENCE\NIST_2018_005.XML 

9 

and development arrangements, grants, and cooperative 

2 agreements or other transactions, as may be necessary in 

3 the conduct of the work of the Institute with respect to 

4 cybersecurity. 

5 SEC. 5. COMPOSITES RESEARCH. 

6 (a) RESEARCH.-The Secretary, acting through the 

7 Director, shall implement the recommendations contained 

8 in the December 2017 report entitled "Road Mapping 

9 Workshop Report on Overcoming Barriers to Adoption of 

10 Composites in Sustainable Infrastructure", as appro11 priate, to help facilitate the adoption of composite tech12 nology in infrastructure in the Uuited States. In imple13 menting such recommendations, the Secretary, aetiug 

14 through the Director shall, with respect to the use of com15 posite technology in infrastructure16 (1) not later than 6 months after the date of 

17 enactment of this Act, establish a design data clear18 inghouse to identifY, gather, validate, and dissemi19 nate existing design criteria, tools, guidelines, and 

20 standards; and 

21 (2) develop methods and resources required for 

22 testing an evaluation of safe and appropriate uses of 

23 composite materials for infrastructure, including24 (A) conditioning protocols, procedures and 

25 models; 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.175.xml 

June 22, 2018 (2:03p.m.) 

(699277110) 
762 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\NIST_2018_005.XML 

10 

1 (B) screening and acceptance tools; and 

2 (C) minimum allowable design data sets 

3 that can be converted into design tools. 

4 (b) STAND.ARDS COORDINATION.-The Secretary, 

5 acting through the Director, shall assure that the appro6 priate Institute staff consult regularly with standards de7 velopers, members of the composites industry, institutions 

8 of higher education, and other stakeholders in order to fa9 cilitate the adoption of standards for use of composite rna10 terials in infrastructure that are based on the research and 

11 testing results and other information developed by the In12 stitute. 

13 (c) FUNDING.-The Secretary of Commerce shall de14 vote $11,000,000 to carry out this section for fiscal year 

15 2019, subject to the availability of appropriations, to come 

16 from amounts made available pursuant to section 

17 2(b)(2)(A)(iv) of this Act. This section shall be carried out 

18 using fnnds otherwise appropriated by law after the date 

19 of enactment of this Act. 

20 SEC. 6. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND DATA SCIENCE. 

21 The Secretary, acting· through the Director, shall con22 tinue to support the development of artificial intelligence 

23 and data science, including through24 ( 1) the expansion of the Institute's capabilities, 

25 including scientific staff and research infrastructure; 

g:IVHLC\062218\062218.175.xml 

June 22, 2018 (2:03p.m.) 

(69927711 0) 
763 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\NIST _2018_005.XML 

11 

(2) the implementation of rigorous scientific 

2 testing to support the development of trustworthy 

3 and safe artificial intelligence and data systems; and 

4 (3) the development of machine learning and 

5 other artificial intelligence applications to support 

6 measurement science research programs and take 

7 steps to modernize the Institute's research infra8 structure. 

9 SEC. 7. INTERNET OF THINGS. 

10 The Secretary, acting through the Director, shall con11 tinue to conduct research "rith respect to and support the 

12 expanded connectivity, interoperability, and security of 

13 interconnected systems and other aspects of the internet 

14 of things, including throughIS (1) the development of new tools and meth16 odologies for cybersecurity of the internet of things; 

17 (2) the development of technologies to address 

18 network congestion and device interference, such as 

19 the development of testing tools for next generation 

20 wireless communications, internet of things proto21 cols, coexistence of wireless communications systems, 

22 and spectrum sharing; 

23 (3) convening experts in the public and private 

24 sectors to develop recommendations for accelerating 

25 the adoption of sound interoperability standards, 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.175.xml 

June 22. 2018 (2:03p.m.) 

(699277110) 
764 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\NIST _20 18_005.XML 

12 

1 guidelines, and best practices for the internet of 

2 things; and 

3 (4) the development and publication of new 

4 cybersecurity tools, encryption methods, and best 

5 practices for internet of things security. 

6 SEC. 8. HIRING AND MANAGEMENT. 

7 (a) APPOINTMENTS.-'l'he Secretary, acting through 

8 the Director shall have the authority t(}-

9 (1) make appointments of scientific, engineer-

! 0 ing·, and professional personnel without rcg·ard to the 

11 civil service laws as the Secretary, acting through 

12 the Director determines necessary for carrying out 

13 research and development functions which require 

14 the services of specially qualified personnel relating 

15 to cybersecurity and quantum information science 

16 and technology and such other areas of national rc17 search priorities as the Secretary, acting through the 

18 Director may determine; and 

19 (2) fix the basic pay of such personnel at a rate 

20 to be determined by the Secretary, acting through 

21 the Director at rates not in excess of the basic rate 

22 of pay of the Vice President under section 104 of 

23 title 3, United States Code, ·without regard to the 

24 civil service laws. 

g:IVHLC\062218\062218.175.xml 

June 22, 2018 (2:03p.m.) 

(699277110) 
765 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\NIST_2018_005.XML 

13 

(b) LIMITATION.-The Director may appoint not 

2 more than 10 individuals under this section. 

3 SEC. 9. DEFINITIONS. 

4 In this Act: 

5 (1) The term "Director" means the Director of 

6 the National Institute of Standards and Technology. 

7 (2) The term "Framework" means the Frame8 work for Improving Critical Infrastructure 

9 Cybersecurity developed by the National Institute of 

10 Standards and 'l'echnology and referred to in Execu11 tive Order 13800 issued on May 11, 2017 (82 Fed. 

12 Reg. 22391 et seq.). 

13 (3) The term "Institute" means the National 

14 Institute of Standards and Technology. 

15 ( 4) The term "institution of higher education" 

16 has the meaning given such term in section 101 of 

17 the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 

18 1001). 

19 (5) The term "Secretary" means the Secretary 

20 of Commerce. 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.175.xml 

June 22, 2018 (2:03p.m.) 

(69927711 0) 
766 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\NIST _2018_MGRS_O l.XML 

AMENDMENT TO -----

OFFERED BY MRs. COMSTOCK OF VIRGINIA 

[Page and line numbers refer to NIST __ 2018_005 posted to 

Science, Space, and Technology committee website with 

timestamp of June 22, 2018 at 2:03PM.] 

Page 2, line 11, strike "activities, of which" and all 

that follows through the period on line 20, and insert 

"activities.". 

Page 2, line 24, strike "$1,115,000,000" and insert 

"$1, 125,000,000". 

Page 3, line 20, strike "$145,000,000" and insert 

"$155,000,000". 

Page 3, line 21, strike "activities, of which-" and 

all that follows through the period on page 4, line 7, and 

insert "activities.". 

Page 6, line 21, strike "2(b)2(A)(iii)" and insert 

"2(b )(2)(A)(iii)". 

Page 7, line 8, strike "cybersecurity," and all that 

follows through " 

"cybersecurity; and". 

g:\VHLC\062618\062618.218.xml 

June 26, 2018 (4:23p.m.) 

(70061413) 

and" on line 10, and insert 
767 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OO l.XML 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION 

(Original Signature of Member) 

H.R. 

To direct the Secretary of Commerce to provide for ciYil space situational 

awareness sen-ic<:>s and information, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

Mr. SMITH of Texas introduced the following hill; which was referred to the 

Committee on ____________ _ 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Commerce to provide for civil 

space situational awareness services and information, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be d enacted by the Senate and House of RepTesenta2 tives of the United States of Amm·ica in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "American Space Situa5 tional Awareness and Framework for Entity Management 

6 Act" or the "American Space SAFE Management Act". 

7 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

8 In this Act: 

g:\VH LC\062218\062218.042.xml 

June 22, 2018 (1 0:27a.m.) 

(698750121) 
768 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OOI.XML 

2 

1 (1) APPROPRIATE COMMITTEES OF CON2 GRESS.-The term "appropriate committees of Con3 gress" means the Committee on Science, Space, and 

4 Technology of the House of Representatives and the 

5 Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transpor6 tation of the Senate. 

7 (2) NASA-The term "NASA" means the Na8 tional Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

9 SEC. 3. NATIONAL CIVIL SPACE SITUATIONAL AWARENESS 

10 AND SPACE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SCIENCE 

11 AND TECHNOLOGY PLAN. 

12 (a) POLICY.-It is the policy of the United States to 

13 encourage the coordination of public and private sector 

14 science and technology activities to improve space situa15 tional awareness and space traffic management. 

16 (b) PI..AN.-Not later than 180 days after the date 

17 of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of NASA, in 

18 consultation with other Federal departments and agencies, 

19 as appropriate, shall develop and submit to the appro20 priate committees of Congress a national civil space situa21 tional awareness and space traffic management science 

22 and technology plan. 

23 (c) PURPOSE.-The Plan developed under subsection 

24 (b) shall carry out the policy set forth nnder subsection 

25 (a) by identifying and prioritizing civil space situational 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.042.xml 

June 22, 2018 (10:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
769 

G:\CMTE\Sai5\SPACE\SSA_OOI.XML 

3 

awareness and space traffic management research and de2 velopment activities in support of the activities to be con3 ducted pursuant to sections 4 and 5. 

4 (d) CONTENTS.-'l'he plan developed under sub5 section (b) shall include recommendations6 (1) to improve coordination among Federal de7 partments and agencies on civil space situational 

8 awareness and space traffic management research 

9 and development; 

10 (2) to promote and facilitate private investment 

11 in civil space situational awareness and space traffic 

12 management research and development; 

13 (3) to identifY current and project future pn14 vate investment in civil space situational awareness 

15 and space traffic management research and develop16 ment; 

17 ( 4) to work proactively 'vith the private sector 

18 to avoid competing with, disincentivizing, or other19 wise discouraging private sector research and devel20 opment investment; and 

21 (5) to prioritize Federal Government invest22 ments in civil space situational awareness and space 

23 traffic management research and development to 

24 occur over a 5-year funding period. 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.042.xml 

June 22,2018 (10:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
770 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OO!.XML 

4 

(e) AVAIL.ABIJ,ITY.-The Administrator shall ensure 

2 that the plan developed under subsection (b), and any up3 dates to such plan, are made available on a publicly acces4 sible website and published in the Federal Register. 

5 (f) UPDATED PLAN.-Every 5 years, the Adminis6 trator shall update the plan and submit the updated plan 

7 to the appropriate committees of Congress. 

8 (g) A..'\TNUAL BUDGET.-In submitting each annual 

9 budget request to Congress, the President shall identify 

10 activities to implement the plan. 

11 (h) CENTER POR CIVIL SPACE SITUATIONAL AWARE12 NESS Ac'-JD SPACE TRAB'PIC 1\1.A-''<AGEMEN'r SCIENCE Ac'.'D 

14 (1) ESTABLISHMENT.-The Administrator of 

15 NASA shall establish, through a competitive process, 

16 a Center for Civil Space Situational Awareness and 

17 Space Traffic Manag·ement Science and Technology 

18 Excellence at a United States academic institution 

19 or institutions. 

20 (2) PURPOSE.-The purpose of the Center cs21 tablished under paragraph (1), taking into account 

22 the plan established in this section, shall he to de23 velop, lead, and promote research that furthers civil 

24 space situational awareness, space traffic coordiua25 tion, and space traffic management. 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.042.xml 

June 22, 2018 (10:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
771 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OOI.XML 

5 

(3) FUNDING.-NASA shall devote not less 

2 than $2,000,000 to carry out this subsection for 

3 each of fiscal years 2019 through 2023, subject to 

4 the availability of appropriations, to come from 

5 amounts made available for NASA. This subsection 

6 shall be carried out using funds otherwise appro7 priated by law after the date of enactment of this 

8 Act. 

9 SEC. 4. CIVIL SPACE SITUATIONAL AWARENESS PROGRAM. 

10 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds that11 ( 1) commercial activity in space is accelerating 

12 and the United States has a grmving commercial 

13 space market; 

14 (2) the number of launches and satellites in 

15 orbit will grow significantly in the near future, in16 creasing the number of objects, satellites, and de17 bris, and the risk of collisions; and 

18 (3) responsible space operations has large impli19 cations for the sustainability of space activities, and 

20 in turn the prosperity and national security of the 

21 United States. 

22 (b) PoucY.-It is the policy of the United States to 

23 establish and maintain a civil space situational awareness 

24 program that provides the public space situational aware25 ness information and services in order to facilitate a safe 

g:WHLC\062218\062218.042.xml 

June 22,2018 (10:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
772 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OO I.XML 

6 

operational environment. The Program established under 

2 subsection (c) shall facilitate and promote opportunities 

3 for United States private sector providers of space situa4 tiona! awareness data, information, and services to partici5 pate in and contribute to the Program. The Program shall 

6 promote broad participation from both domestie and inter7 national spacecraft operators. 

8 (c) ESTABLISHMENT.-No later than 1 year after the 

9 date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Commerce 

10 shall establish a civil space situational awareness program 

11 (in this section, referred to as the "Program") to provide 

12 spaee situational awareness serviees and information to, 

13 and obtain space situational awareness data and informa14 tion from, eligible entities described under subsection (e), 

15 in accordanee with this section. 

16 (d) CoNSULTATION.-ln developing the Program, the 

17 Secretary of Commerce shall consult with18 (1) other I<""'ederal departments and agencies, as 

19 the Secretary considers appropriate; and 

20 (2) the United States private sector and aca21 demia. 

22 (e) ELIGIBLE ENTITIES.-The Secretary may provide 

23 services and information under the Program to, and may 

24 obtain data and information from, an entity, including any 

25 of the following: 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.042.xml 

June 22, 2018 (10:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
773 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OOl.XML 

7 

(1) A State. 

2 (2) A political subdivision of a State. 

3 (3) A 1;nited States commercial entity. 

4 (4) The government of a foreign country. 

5 ( 5) A foreign commercial entity. 

6 (f) USER FEES.-

7 (1) No I<'EE J;'OR BASIC SET.-ln providing 

8 space situational awareness services and information 

9 under the Program, the Secretary shall provide a 

10 basic set of such services and information, as deter11 mined by the Secretary, without charging a user fee. 

12 (2) ADDITIONAL SERVICES Ac'\D ll\'FOK\IA13 TION.-The Secretary is authorized to charge a rea14 sonable user fee for any additional space situational 

15 awareness services and infornmtion not provided 

16 under paragraph ( 1). 

17 (3) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.-Nothing in 

18 this subsection shall he construed to preclude private 

19 sector entities from charging a user fee for providing 

20 space situational awareness services and informa21 tion. 

22 (g) QUALITY OF SERVICES Al'\D INFORMATION.-The 

23 Program shall pro\~de space situational awareness services 

24 and information that are as good as or better thau the 

25 services and information provided pursuant to section 

g:IVHLC\0622181062218.042.xml 

June 22, 2018 (1 0:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
774 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OOI.XML 

8 

2274 of title 10, United States Code, as determined by 

2 the Secretary. 

3 (h) SPACE SITUATIONAL AWARENESS DATA 

4 TESTBED.-In carrying out the Program, the Secretary 

5 shall provide for a space situational awareness data 

6 testbed to facilitate innovation in the use of space situa7 tiona! awareness data to support space situational aware8 ness services that may be provided by the Federal Govern9 ment or the private sector. The testbed shall allow the 

10 public to access such space situational awareness data, in11 eluding United States Government data, as the Secretary 

12 considers appropriate. The Secretary shall place condi13 tions on such data in consultation with appropriate Fed14 era! departments and agencies to protect United States 

15 national security and foreign policy interests. 

16 (i) PROMOTING PRIVA'l'BJ SEC'l'OR SOLUTIONS.-'l'he 

17 Secretary shall facilitate and promote opportunities for 

18 United States private sector providers of space situational 

19 awareness data, information, and services to participate 

20 in and contribute to the Program. 

21 (j) ROLE OF NASA-In carrying out the Program, 

22 the Secretary of Commerce may use, on a reimbursable 

23 basis and to the greatest extent practicable, NASA's ex:ist24 ing infrastructure, workforce, and experience relating to 

25 space situational awareness, including conjunction assessg:\VHLC\062218\062218.042.xml 

June 22, 2018 (10:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
775 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OOl.XML 

9 

ments that NASA provides for NASA robotic and erewed 

2 operations. 

3 (k) IMMUNITY.-The United States, any agencies and 

4 instrumentalities thereof, including the Department of 

5 Commerce and NASA, and any individuals, firms, cor6 porations, and other persons acting for the United States, 

7 shall be immune from any suit in any court for any cause 

8 of action arising from the provision or receipt of space 

9 situational awareness services or information, whether or 

10 not provided in accordance w·ith this seetion, or any re11 lated action or omission. 

12 (I) QUARTERLY BRIEFING.-The Department of 

13 Commerce and NASA shall brief the appropriate commit14 tees of Congress quarterly, beginning on the date that is 

15 3 months after the date of enactment of this Act, on the 

16 status of, and all progress, changes, and other develop17 ments related to, carrying out the Program. 

18 (m) PROGRAM UsERS.-The Secretary shall, to the 

19 maximum extent feasible and as soon as is practicable 

20 after the establishment of the Program, engage with and 

21 solicit feedback from stakeholders that are contributors to 

22 or recipients of space situational awareness services and 

23 information under the Program in order to, at a minimum, 

24 receive practical information on the effectiveness of the 

g:\VHLC\06221 B\062218.042.xml 

June 22,2018 (10:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
776 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OO!.XML 

10 

Program and receive recommendations on how to improve 

2 the Program. 

3 (n) S'l'ATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.-Nothing in this 

4 section may be construed to modify any other authorities 

5 for the Federal Government to provide space situational 

6 awareness services and information to the public. 

7 (o) FuNDING.-The Seeretary shall devote no less 

8 than $20,000,000 to carry out this section for each of fis9 cal years 2019 through 2023, subject to the availability 

10 of appropriations, to come from amounts made available 

11 for the Office of the Secretary. This section shall be car12 ried out using funds otherwise appropriated by law after 

13 the date of enactment of this Act. 

14 SEC. 5. SPACE TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK. 

15 (a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds the following: 

16 (1) The United States has the capability to rap17 idly develop voluntary civil space traffic coordination 

18 guidelines, practices, and standards. 

19 (2) It is in the national interest that the United 

20 States leads the world in the development of vol21 untary civil space traffic coordination ~,ruidelines, 

22 practices, and standards in cooperation ·with the pri23 vate sector in the United States. 

24 (3) The United States should promote the 

25 international adoption of such civil space traffic cog:\VHLC\062218\062218.042.xml 

June 22,2018 (10:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
777 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OOI.XML 

11 

ordination guidelines, practices, and standards devel2 oped in the United States. 

3 ( 4) Establishing· voluntary civil space traffic co4 ordination guidelines, practices, and standards is an 

5 important first step in developing a comprehensive 

6 space traffic management framework. 

7 (b) Pow_.'Y.-It is the policy of the United States to 

8 timely develop voluntary civil space traffic coordination 

9 guidelines, practices, and standards to ensure a safe oper1 0 ational environment. 

11 (c) VOLUNTARY Crvu, SPACE TRAFFIC COORDINA12 TION GUIDELIN'ES, PRACTICES, AN"D STANDARDS.-

13 (1) IN GENERAh-The Secretary of Commerce 

14 shall, in consultation with appropriate governmental 

15 and nongovernmental entities, promote the deYelop16 ment of voluntary civil space traffic coordination 

17 guidelines, practices, and standards to ensure a safe 

18 operational environment. 

19 (2) GUIDELINES.-

20 (A) IN GENERAL.-N ot later than 1 year 

21 after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 

22 Secretary of Commerce shall publish voluntary 

23 civil space traffic coordination guidelines. Such 

24 guidelines shall be developed in consultation 

25 with other relevant Federal agencies, domestic 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.042.xml 

June 22, 2018 (1 0:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
778 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OOl.XML 

12 

1 private entities (including entities iu the com2 mercia! sector and institutions of higher edu3 cation (as such term is defined in section 101 

4 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 

5 U.S.C. 1001))). 

6 (B) PUBLIC COMMENT.-To facilitate and 

7 assure ample opportunity for input from domes8 tic private entities specified in subparagraph 

9 (A), during the period in which the development 

10 of the guidelines under such subparagraph oc11 curs, the Secretary of Commerce shall allow for 

12 a public comment period to identify key issues, 

13 trends, and needs that should be addressed dur14 ing the period of that development. 

15 (C) USE OF' GUIDELINES.-Federal agen16 cies operating spacecraft shall, to the extent 

17 practicable and taking into account the national 

18 security interests of the United States in oper19 ating such spacecraft, follow the guidelines 

20 issued under subparagraph (A). 

21 (d) PILOT PROGRAM.-

22 (1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 18 months 

23 after the date of enactment of this Act, the Sec24 retary of Commerce shall establish a civil space traf25 fie coordination pilot program under which the Secg:\VHLC\062218\062218.042.xml 

June 22, 2018 (10:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
779 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OOI.XML 

13 

retary will, using the guidelines, practices, and 

2 standards developed under subsection (c) to the 

3 gTeatest extent practicable, facilitate communication, 

4 coordination, negotiation, and resolution among do5 mestie and international civil spacecraft operators 

6 (including governmental and private entities oper7 ating sueh spaeeeraft) for the purposes of improving 

8 the safety of spaeeflight. The Secretary shall, to the 

9 greatest extent praetieable, ineentivize participation 

10 in the pilot program. ~othing in the preeeding sen11 tenee shall be eonstrued as requiring a private entity 

12 to partieipate in such pilot program. 

13 (2) Pl'B!JIC COMMENT.-Before establishing the 

14 pilot program under this subseetion, the Seeretary of 

15 Commeree shall publish information about the pro16 gram's details in the Federal Register and allow for 

17 publie comment for a reasonable period that ends 

18 before the date of sueh establishment. 

19 (3) DFRATION.-The authority to earry out the 

20 pilot program under this subsection shall terminate 

21 on the date that is 5 years after the pilot program 

22 under paragTaph (1) is established. 

23 (4) PILO'r PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS.-The See24 retary shall, to the maximum extent feasible and as 

25 soon as is praetieable after the date on which the 

g:\ VHLC\062218\062218.042.xml 

June 22,2018 (10:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
780 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OOI.XML 

14 

pilot program is established under paragraph ( 1), 

2 engage with and solicit feedback from pilot program 

3 participants, in order to, at minimum, receive prac4 tical information on the effectiveness of the pilot 

5 program and receive recommendations on how to im6 prove the pilot program. 

7 (5) FuNDING.-The Secretary of Commerce 

8 shall devote no less than $5,000,000 for each of fis9 cal years 2019 through 2023 to carry out this sub10 section, subject to the availability of appropriations, 

11 to come from amounts made available for the Office 

12 of the Secretary. This snbsection shall be carried out 

13 using funds otherwise appropriated by law after the 

14 date of enactment of this Act. 

15 (e) REPORTS.-

16 (1) SPACE TRAFFIC COORDINATION ST1\J.'iD17 ARDS.-Not later than 180 days after the date of 

18 the enactment of this Aet, the Secretary of Com19 merce shall submit to the appropriate committees of 

20 Congress a report on the role the Department of 

21 Commerce, including the National Institute of 

22 Standards and Technology, will have in the develop23 ment of civil space traffic coordination standards for 

24 purposes of promoting innovation and the competi25 tiveness of the United States. 

g:\VHLCI062218\062218.042.xml 

June 22.2018 (10:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
781 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_OO l.XML 

15 

(2) REPORT ON NEXT STEPS F'OR SPACE TRAF2 FIC lVIAL.._AGEMENT FRA.lWEWORK.-Beginning not 

3 later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of 

4 this Act and every 2 years thereafter, the Secretary 

5 of Commerce shall submit to the appropriate com6 mittees of Congress a report on, for the period cov7 ered by the reportS (A) the state of domestic and international 

9 civil space traffic management, including vol1 0 untary or legally binding guidelines, practices, 

11 and standards; and 

12 (B) the Secretary's recommendations on 

13 what steps should be taken by the United 

14 States to facilitate further development and 

15 adoption of the guidelines, practices, and stand16 ards developed under subsection (c) and coordi17 nation carried out pursuant to subsection (d). 

g:\VHLC\062218\062218.042.xml 

June 22, 2018 (1 0:27 a.m.) 

(698750121) 
782 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_002.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 

OFFERED BY MR. SMITH OF TEXAS 

Page 6, line 14, strike "subsection (e)" and insert 

"subsection (f)". 

Page 6, after line 21, insert the following (and redesignate accordingly): 

1 (e) TRAl'-.fSITION PLAN.-No later than 6 months 

2 after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretaries 

3 of Commerce and Defense, in coordination with relevant 

4 agencies, shall submit a plan to the appropriate commit5 tees of Congress outlining the transition of a space situa6 tiona! awareness information and services program to the 

7 Department of Commerce and how a gap in providing 

8 space situational awareness information and services will 

9 be prevented. The Transition Plan shall identifY the capa1 0 bilities the Department of Commerce will require to carry 

11 out the space situational awareness responsibilities, in12 eluding workforce, facilities, and training; the cost of those 

13 capabilities; and the estimated date when those capabili14 ties will be i.n place. In addition, the Transition Plan shall 

15 describe how the Department of Commerce will stmcture 

g:\VHLC\062618\062618.Q14.xml 

June 26.2018 (9:37a.m.) 

(70041413) 
783 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_002.XML 

2 

1 any partnerships with commercial and international enti2 ties. 

Page 8, line 21, insert "implementing and" before 

"carrying out the Program". 

Page 9, after line 2, insert the follo"\\1.ng (and redesignate accordingly): 

3 {k) OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES.-In implementing 

4 and cariJ1.ng out the Program, the Secretary of Commerce 

5 may leverage existing workforce and experience of other 

6 Federal agencies relating to space situational awareness 

7 for the training of staff and other needs as determined 

8 by the Secretary. 

Page 11, line 10, insert "and inform development of 

a comprehensive space traffic management framework" 

before the period. 

Page 15, strike lines 12 through 17 and insert the 

following: 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

g:\VHLC\062618\062618.G14.xml 

June 26, 2018 (9:37a.m.) 

(B) the Secretary's recommendations on 

what steps should be taken by the United 

States to facilitate-

(i) further development and adoption 

of the guidelines, practices, and standards 

developed under subsection (c); 

(70041413) 
784 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_002.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

3 

(ii) coordination carried out pursuant 

to subsection (d); and 

(iii) development of a comprehensive 

space traffic management framework. 

g:\VHLC\062618\06261 8.Q14.xml 

June 26,2018 (9:37a.m.) 

(70041413) 
785 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_ANS_OOI.XML 

AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE 

TOH.R. 

OFFERED BY Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON OF 

TEXAS 

[Amendment drafted to version of SSA _ 001 posted on 

Science, Space, and Technology committee website with the 

timestamp of June 22, 2018 at 10:27AM)] 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 

following: 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the "Capabilities Assess3 ment for Space Situational Awareness and Space Safety 

4 Support Act of 2018". 

5 SEC. 2. CAPABILITIES ASSESSMENT. 

6 (a) ASSESSMENT.-Subject to subsection (b), the Ad7 ministrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Admin8 istration (in this section referred to as the "Adminis9 trator") shall enter into an arrangement with the National 

10 Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to 

11 carry out an assessment of the capabilities and skills of 

12 civil Federal Government entities related to the provision 

13 of space situational awareness data, information, and serv14 ices. The assessment shallg:\VHLC\062618\062618.222.xml 

June 26, 2018 (4:26 p.m.) 

(70052916) 
786 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SP ACE\SSA_ANS_OOl.XML 

2 

(1) identify and assess such capabilities and 

2 skills for managing and providing space situational 

3 awareness data, information, and services to civil 

4 Federal Government entities and any other relevant 

5 entities, including commercial and foreign operators; 

6 (2) identify the capabilities, skills, and facilities 

7 needed for a civil Federal Government entity to pro8 vide nonregulatory space safety operational support; 

9 (3) identify issues, including accountability, en10 forcement, insurance, and international governance, 

11 and make recommendations related to a civil Federal 

12 Government entity providing space safety support; 

13 ( 4) identify and prioritize approaches for 

14 transitioning the provision of civil space situational 

15 awareness data, information, and services currently 

16 with the Department of Defense to a civil l<1

ederal 

17 Government entity; 

18 (5) recommend a lead civil Federal Government 

19 entity to carry out the provision of civil space situa20 tiona! awareness data, information, and services; 

21 ( 6) identify the capabilities, skills, and facilities 

22 needed for a civil l<1

ederal Government entity to pro23 vide regulatory space traffic coordination; and 

24 (7) identify issues, including accountability, en25 forcement, insuranee, and international governance, 

g:\VHLC\062618\062618.222.xml 

June 26, 2018 (4:26 p.m.) 

(70052916) 
787 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SSA_ANS_OOl.XML 

3 

and make recommendations for a framework or 

2 strategy for the eventual provision by a civil Federal 

3 Government entity of regulatory space traffic coordi4 nation. 

5 (b) ARR.A.J'-'GEMENT.-

6 (1) IN GENER.AL.-The Administrator shall re7 quest the National Academies of Science, Engineer8 ing, and Medicine to conduct the study required by 

9 subsection (a) under an arrangement under which 

10 the actual e:A-penses incurred by such Academies in 

11 conducting such study will be paid by the Adminis12 trator. If the Academies are vvilling to do so, the Ad13 ministrator shall enter into such an arrangement 

14 with such Academies for the conduct of such study. 

15 (2) REFUSAL.-If the National Academies of 

16 Science, Engineering, and Medicine are unwilling to 

17 conduct such study under such an arrangement, 

18 then the Administrator shall enter into a similar ar19 rangement with other appropriate nonprofit private 

20 groups or associations under which such groups or 

21 associations will conduct such study and prepare and 

22 submit the reports thereon as provided in subsection 

23 (c). 

24 (3) CoNSULTATION.-The National Academies 

25 of Science, Engineering, and Medicine or other 

g:\VHLC\062618\062618.222.xml 

June 26, 2018 (4:26p.m.) 

(70052916) 
788 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SP ACE\SSA_ANS_OO l.XML 

4 

1 group or association conducting the study required 

2 by subsection (a) shall conduct such study in con3 sultation ¥lith the Administrator. 

4 (c) 'fRANSMITTAL.-Not later than 13 months after 

5 the date of the enactment of this Act, the assessment con6 dueted under subsection (a) shall be transmitted to the 

7 Committee on Science, Space, and Technology and the 

8 Committee on Armed Services of the House of Represent9 atives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

10 Transportation and the Committee on Armed Services of 

11 the Senate. 

12 (d) DEFINITIONS.-In this section, the term "civil 

13 Federal Government entity" refers to any Federal agency 

14 (including any service, department, or other subdivision 

15 thereof) other than the Department of Defense (or any 

16 service, department, or other subdivision thereof). 

g:\VHLC\062618\062618.222.xml 

June 26. 2018 (4:26p.m.) 

(70052916) 
(789) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUP ON H.R. 6398, 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

VETERANS’ HEALTH INITIATIVE ACT 

WEDNESDAY, JULY 18, 2018 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:09 a.m., in room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of the Committee at any time. 

Pursuant to Committee rule 2(e) and House rule XI(2)(h)(4), the 

Chair announces that he may postpone roll call votes on the following bill, which we meet to consider, H.R. 6398, the Department 

of Energy Veterans’ Health Initiative Act. 

I now recognize myself for an opening statement. 

Today, we consider H.R. 6398, the Department of Energy Veterans’ Health Initiative Act, introduced by Energy Subcommittee 

Member Ralph Norman and co-sponsored by joint Veterans Affairs 

and Science Committee Members Neal Dunn and Clay Higgins, as 

well as 12 other Science Committee Members. 

This legislation authorizes the Department of Energy to conduct 

collaborative research with the Department of Veterans Affairs in 

order to solve complex, big-data challenges focused on veterans’ 

health care and basic science. 

Currently, DOE and the VA collaborate through the Million Veterans Program-Computational Health Analytics for Medical Precision to Improve Outcomes Now, or MVP-CHAMPION program, 

which is the longest acronym I’ve ever encountered. And I forgot 

to ask which staff Member came up with that. We’ll talk later on. 

Oh, DOE, OK. 

Through this initiative, the VA collects genomic and healthcare 

data from veterans who volunteer for the program. The VA then 

provides this data to DOE, where it is stored in a secure site at 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory. This partnership provides VA researchers access to DOE’s high-performance computing research facilities, like the world’s fastest supercomputer, the Summit computer at Oak Ridge. It also leverages DOE’s expertise in complex 

modeling and data analysis, which can help the VA use their data 
790 

to learn more about the causes and warning signs of various diseases. 

By giving DOE access to a large-scale data base, the VA will help 

the Energy Department develop next-generation computing, algorithms, and modeling capability. While these tools can help the VA 

develop quality health care for veterans, they can also be applied 

to computing efforts in support of DOE’s core mission programs, 

such as materials science, physics, or nuclear weapons research. 

This legislation will leverage DOE’s world-leading computing capability to provide the VA with data analysis to improve veterans’ 

quality of life. 

Mr. Norman’s bill also authorizes a 2-year, crosscutting research 

pilot program to advance research in artificial intelligence, data 

analytics, and computational research. This pilot program supports 

DOE’s efforts to improve the analysis and interpretation of big-data 

challenges to meet the nuclear security, energy, and science mission goals of the Department. It will facilitate more collaborations 

like DOE’s work with the VA, giving Federal agencies, academia, 

and industry the chance to benefit from the Department’s expertise. 

I thank the bill’s sponsors for bringing this important legislation 

before us today. 

And finally, we are postponing action on the other bill noticed for 

this morning to address jurisdictional concerns. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

Today we will consider H.R. 6398, the Department of Energy Veterans’ Health Initiative Act, introduced by Energy Subcommittee member Ralph Norman, and cosponsored by joint Veterans Affairs and Science Committee members Neal Dunn 

and Clay Higgins, as well as 12 other Science Committee members. 

This legislation authorizes the Department of Energy (DOE) to conduct collaborative research with the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in order to solve complex, big data challenges focused on veteran’s health care and basic science. 

Currently, DOE and the VA collaborate through the ‘‘Million Veterans ProgramComputational Health Analytics for Medical Precision to Improve Outcomes Now,’’ 

or MVP-CHAMPION program. 

Through this initiative, the VA collects genomic and health care data from veterans who volunteer for the program. The VA then provides this data to DOE, 

where it is stored in a secure site at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. 

This partnership provides VA researchers access to DOE’s high performance computing research facilities-like the world’s fastest supercomputer, the Summit computer at Oak Ridge. It also leverages DOE’s expertise in complex modeling and data 

analysis, which can help the VA use their data to learn more about the causes and 

warning signs of various diseases. 

By giving DOE access to a large-scale database, the VA will help the Energy Department develop next generation computing, algorithms and modeling capability. 

While these tools can help the VA develop quality healthcare for veterans, they 

can also be applied to computing efforts in support of DOE’s core mission programs, 

such as materials science, physics or nuclear weapons research. 

This legislation will leverage DOE’s world-leading computing capability to provide 

the VA with data analysis to improve veterans’ quality of life. 

Mr. Norman’s bill also authorizes a two-year, cross-cutting research pilot program 

to advance research in artificial intelligence, data analytics and computational research. This pilot program supports DOE’s efforts to improve the analysis and interpretation of big data challenges to meet the nuclear security, energy and science 

mission goals of the Department. 

It will facilitate more collaborations like DOE’s work with the VA, giving federal 

agencies, academia and industry the chance to benefit from the Department’s expertise. I thank the bill’s sponsors for bringing this important legislation before us 

today. 
791 

Finally, we are postponing action on the other bill noticed for this morning to address jurisdictional matters related to the bill. We plan to take action on the bill 

in the near future. 

Chairman SMITH. With that, I’ll yield to the Ranking Member, 

the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Johnson, for her opening statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And good 

morning to everyone. 

Today, we are marking up the Department of Energy’s Veterans’ 

Health Initiative Act. This bill codifies actions that were proposed 

in the last budget request. The bill authorizes the Department of 

Energy or DOE to conduct collaborative research with Department 

of Veterans Affairs in order to address complex, large data-management challenges associated with veterans’ healthcare issues. 

This bill also directs DOE to carry out a 2-year research pilot 

program to advance research in artificial intelligence and data analytics for a broad range of potential applications. These are both 

worthy ideas, and I support both of these activities. For that reason, I will not oppose the passage of this bill today. However, I 

think these worthy activities could have been better addressed by 

our Committee if we had been a little bit more thoughtful in drafting this legislation. 

When this bill was noticed for markup last Friday, the bill had 

still not been vetted by the VA or the Veterans’ Affairs Committee. 

Given that the bill is about veterans’ affairs, that seems like a pretty big oversight. 

We’re going to consider the manager’s amendment to address 

some of the concerns that we have heard from them, and I understand that the VA has expressed concern about the bill in general. 

Perhaps if we really wanted to help the veterans at the heart of 

this bill, we should have legislated with a little bit more care because passing this bill out of Committee today doesn’t accomplish 

anything if the bill ends up dying in the Veterans’ Affairs Committee. 

I would note that this bill has already been referred to the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, so I think it is vitally important that we 

work collaboratively with them on this legislation as we move forward. 

Thank you, and I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you, Chairman Smith, and good morning to everyone. Today we are marking up the Department of Energy Veterans’ Health Initiative Act. This bill codifies 

actions that were proposed in the last budget request. The bill authorizes the Department of Energy (DOE) to conduct collaborative research with the Department 

of Veterans Affairs (VA) in order to address complex, large data management challenges associated with veterans’ health care issues. 

This bill also directs DOE to carry out a two-year research pilot program to advance research in artificial intelligence and data analytics for a broad range of potential applications. These are both worthy ideas, and I support both of these activities. For that reason, I will not oppose passage of this bill today. However, I think 

these worthy activities could have been better addressed by our Committee if we 

had been a little more thoughtful in drafting this legislation. When this bill was noticed for markup last Friday, the bill had still not been vetted by the VA or the Veterans Affairs Committee. Given that the bill is about veterans affairs, that seems 

like a big oversight. We are going to consider a Manager’s Amendment to address 

some of the concerns that we’ve now heard from them, but I understand that the 

VA has expressed concern about the bill in general. 
792 

Perhaps if we really wanted to help the veterans at the heart of this bill, we 

should have legislated with a little more care, because passing this bill out of Committee today doesn’t accomplish anything if the bill ends up dying at the Veterans 

Affairs Committee. I would note that this bill has already been referred to the Veterans Affairs Committee. So I think it is vitally important that we work collaboratively with them on this legislation as we move forward. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 6398, the Department of 

Energy Veterans’ Health Initiative Act, and the clerk will report the 

bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 6398, a bill to authorize the Department of Energy to conduct collaborative research with the Department of Veterans Affairs in order to improve healthcare services for veterans 

in the United States and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. And I’ll recognize myself briefly to comment on the legislation. 

H.R. 6398 maximizes the impact of Department of Energy resources, research, and expertise, and ensures that the Department 

of Veterans Affairs can provide the best possible care to our veterans. 

I look forward to hearing from the bill’s sponsors and encourage 

my colleagues to support this bill. 

I now recognize the bill’s sponsor, the gentleman from South 

Carolina, Mr. Norman, to speak on the legislation. 

Mr. NORMAN. Thank you, Chairman Smith and Ranking Member 

Johnson. 

I got an excited call this morning from a military vet who—and 

I didn’t realize this, but Marcus Latrell, the lone survivor whose 

publicized brother is a vital part of this action that we’ve decided 

to take today, which adds more emphasis to it. 

My bill—as has been said, my bill authorizes partnership between DOE and the Department of Veterans Affairs to advance research focused on artificial intelligence, big-data science, and the 

high-priority health care needs of the Veterans Administration. 

Because of the millions of veterans that have received care over 

time, the VA hosts one of the world’s largest and most valuable 

health and genomic data repositories. In order to learn from this 

data and provide better health care for veterans, the VA needs access to more advanced computing capabilities, expertise, and infrastructure than is currently available within the agency. 

DOE is a world leader in high-performance computing and is 

well-suited to meet this need. With its national laboratory system, 

DOE has a unique set of cutting-edge research capabilities like six 

of the world’s ten fastest computers, which were designed to solve 

a variety of complex big-data challenges in the physical sciences. 

The interagency partnership authorizes in my bill combines 

DOE’s big-data science expertise with VA clinical and population 

science expertise in order to solve critical healthcare challenges for 

veterans, while promising to advance big-data science tools for 

American researchers. 

This partnership, called the Million Veterans Program-Computational Health Analytics for Medical Precision to Improve Outcomes 

Now or MVP-CHAMPION—the most valuable champion program— 
793 

will use DOE supercomputers to analyze VA health data, looking 

for patterns and symptoms to improve treatment for heart disease, 

traumatic brain injury, and cancer. 

The bill also requires the Department to establish data enclaves 

to securely store and transmit data provided by the VA, making 

sure privacy and security are maintained for veterans involved in 

this program. 

In addition, this legislation establishes a pilot program within 

DOE to implement a crosscutting research initiative in artificial intelligence, data analytics, and computational research. This program will help DOE scientists gain fundamental knowledge and 

improved understanding of big-data analytics tools in order to address big-data challenges. These tools will both help improve the 

existing DOE-VA partnership and will advance DOE mission goals 

in nuclear security, energy technology development, and innovative 

science research. 

Ultimately, the goal of this legislation is for the DOE national 

laboratories to provide the VA with information it can use to improve healthcare services for veterans. The access to the breadth, 

depth, and complexity of the VA dataset will also advance the next 

generation of data science tools. 

The DOE Veterans’ Health Initiative Act promises to improve veterans’ health care and advance DOE capabilities in computer 

science. Our veterans should have access to better healthcare services, and our scientists should remain on the cutting edge of bigdata analytics and advanced computing. 

Once again, I would like to thank Chairman Smith and the other 

Science Committee Members who cosponsored this legislation for 

supporting my bill. I encourage my colleagues to support this bill, 

and I yield back the balance of my time. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. NORMAN

Thank you, Chairman Smith, for the opportunity to speak on behalf of my bill, 

H.R. 6398, the Department of Energy Veterans’ Health Initiative Act. 

My bill authorizes partnership between the Department of Energy (DOE) and the 

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to advance research focused on artificial intelligence, big data science and the high priority health care needs of the VA. 

Because of the millions of veterans that have received care overtime, the VA hosts 

one of the world’s largest and most valuable health and genomic data repositories. 

In order to learn from this data and provide better health care for veterans, the 

VA needs access to more advanced computing capabilities, expertise and infrastructure than is currently available in the agency. 

DOE is a world leader in high performance computing, and is well suited to meet 

this need. With its national laboratory system, DOE has a unique set of cuttingedge research capabilities-like six of the world’s ten fastest supercomputers-designed 

to solve a variety of complex big data challenges in the physical sciences. 

The interagency partnership authorized in my bill combines DOE’s big data 

science expertise with VA clinical and population science expertise in order to solve 

critical health challenges for veterans, while promising to advance big data science 

tools for American researchers. 

This partnership-called the Million Veterans Program-Computational Health Analytics for Medical Precision to Improve Outcomes Now or MVP-CHAMPION program-will use DOE supercomputers to analyze VA health data, looking for patterns 

and symptoms to improve treatment for heart disease, traumatic brain injury and 

cancer. 

The bill also requires the Department to establish data enclaves to securely store 

and transmit data provided by the VA, making sure privacy and security are maintained for veterans involved in the program. 
794 

In addition, this legislation establishes a pilot program within DOE to implement 

a crosscutting research initiative in artificial intelligence, data analytics and computational research. 

This program will help DOE scientists gain fundamental knowledge and improved 

understanding of big data analytics tools in order to address big data challenges. 

These tools will both help improve the existing DOE-VA partnership, and will advance DOE mission goals in nuclear security, energy technology development and 

innovative science research. 

Ultimately, the goal of this legislation is for the DOE national laboratories to provide the VA with information it can use to improve health care services for veterans. 

The access to the breadth, depth and complexity of the VA dataset will also advance 

the next generation of data science tools. 

The Department of Energy Veterans’ Health Initiative Act promises to improve veterans’ health care and advance DOE capabilities in computer science. 

Our veterans should have access to better health care services and our scientists 

should remain on the cutting edge of big data analytics and advanced computing. 

Once again, I would like to thank Chairman Smith and the 13 other Science Committee members who cosponsored this legislation for supporting my bill. I encourage 

my colleagues to support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Norman. 

I understand the gentleman from California, Mr. Takano, has a 

comment on the bill, and he’s recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. TAKANO. Thank you, Chairman Smith and Ranking Member 

Johnson. I move to strike the last word. 

I want to express my concerns for how this bill has been handled. 

I support the aims of the bill, and I think everyone here agrees 

that leveraging technology to improve the health of veterans is a 

good thing. However, the VA and the Department of Energy already have a reimbursement agreement in place to do this work. 

And Veterans’ Affairs Committee staff have informed me that this 

bill might actually make it more difficult for the two departments 

to continue this work. 

Now, I’m encouraged the manager’s amendment seeks to address 

the VA’s concerns, but in the future we need to be engaging agencies sooner and all the stakeholders involved sooner. While I think 

we should be devoting more resources for veterans’ health care and 

research, it is essential that we spend the money effectively. 

I know the VA has expressed concerns about how they would 

spend the money in this bill and the program’s duplicative nature. 

Just yesterday, I presided over a hearing in Veterans’ Affairs Committee where Federal employee representatives told us VA is struggling to find and retain high-quality staff. Now, when we write legislation that affects multiple agencies like this, it is important that 

we take time to consult all the stakeholders. 

I’m very proud of the bipartisan manner in which we often work 

when it comes to veterans’ issues, as many of my colleagues here 

know who serve on both Committees of jurisdiction. In the future, 

and as we move forward on this bill, I hope we can work together 

to make sure we get this right. 

Thank you, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Takano. 

We will now go to amendments, and the only amendment I’m 

aware of I believe will be offered by the gentleman from Florida, 

Mr. Dunn, and he’s recognized for that purpose. 

Mr. DUNN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 
795 

The CLERK. Amendment to H.R. 6398, offered by Mr. Dunn of 

Florida, amendment number 01. Page 5, line 13, insert an order to 

carry out a reimbursable agreement after memorandum of understanding. Page 6, line 11, strike section 4 and all that follows 

through 2020 and line 12 and insert the following: ‘‘section during 

fiscal years 2019 through 2013.’’ 

Chairman SMITH. And without objection, the amendment is considered as read and the gentleman is recognized to explain his 

amendment. 

Mr. DUNN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to introduce my amendment. This straightforward amendment makes 

technical changes requested by the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

My amendment reflects how the VA manages the research program 

authorized in the bill, and it includes language to ensure the appropriate structure for interagency cooperation between the VA and 

the Department of Energy. 

As the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Health on Veterans Affairs, a Member of this Committee, Science, Space, and Technology, 

and as a veteran myself, I’m happy to be an original cosponsor of 

Mr. Norman’s legislation. The collaborative research authorized in 

this bill provides the VA researchers access to the Department of 

Energy’s high-performance computing systems, systems capable of 

making over 200,000 trillion calculations per second. That’s properly 200 quintillion calculations per second. In turn, the Department of Energy receives an access to a massive treasure trove of 

rich, contextualized data from the Veterans Administration. 

VA patients have volunteered for many years genomic and 

healthcare data that the Department of Energy transferred to a secure data site in Oak Ridge. Part of the data includes the most detailed DNA sequencing, allowing for high-quality genomic research. 

With a rich and expansive dataset, the VA’s Million Veterans Program provides an incredible opportunity to use DOE’s next-generation quantum computing capabilities to study and solve complex 

healthcare problems, problems that were previously beyond our 

reach. 

My colleagues on this Committee and I first heard about this 

DOE-VA research partnership during a tour of Argonne National 

Laboratories in May. Not only were DOE researchers excited to develop new methods to help our veterans, but the DOE and the VA 

have potential to solve healthcare problems for all Americans by 

applying these analytical methods, models, and whatnot that are 

developed through this program. 

I’m pleased that the Science Committee has worked so hard and 

so closely with the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee in developing my amendment, which addresses the VA’s technical changes 

and recommendations to improve this bill. I look forward to our 

continued collaboration on H.R. 6398 and hopefully many other 

similar projects in the future. 

I want to thank Representative Ralph Norman and Chairman 

Lamar Smith and all of my Science Committee colleagues for their 

leadership and support of this important and exciting legislation. 

I encourage all of my colleagues to support this amendment, and 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Dunn. 
796 

And the Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from Texas, is recognized for her comments. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I move to 

strike the last word. 

I support the adoption of this amendment. It addresses some of 

the concerns that we’ve heard from the VA and it makes the bill 

a better bill. However, as I noted in my opening statement, it 

would have made more sense to have consulted with the VA and 

the Veterans’ Affairs Committee prior to announcing the markup. 

Then we probably wouldn’t have needed this amendment, and more 

importantly, the bill would face such an—would not be facing such 

an uncertain future. 

I thank you and yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

Is there any further discussion on the amendment? 

If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment offered by 

Mr. Dunn. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

If there are no further amendments, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 6398 to the House, as amended, with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 6398 to the House, 

as amended. 

All those in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, nay. 

The ayes have it, and the bill is ordered reported favorably. 

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

H.R. 6398 is ordered reported to the House. 

I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any 

necessary technical and conforming changes. Without objection, so 

ordered. 

And the gentlewoman from Texas seeks recognition. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, I simply want to welcome our new 

Member, Mr. Cloud—— 

Chairman SMITH. No, no, wait a minute. Wait a minute. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Oh, I’m sorry. 

Chairman SMITH. I’m just getting ready to do that. 

Ms. JOHNSON. OK. 

Chairman SMITH. You can’t—— 

Ms. JOHNSON. I’ll wait. 

Chairman SMITH. You—I—you can’t get ahead of me on this. 

And—you weren’t looking at my notes or you would have 

seen—— 

Ms. JOHNSON. No, I didn’t. 

Chairman SMITH [continuing]. He was up next. 

Ms. JOHNSON. I should have been looking over there. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. And I would like to welcome and obviously 

recognize the newest Member of the Science Committee, the gentleman from Texas’ 27th District, Michael Cloud. Michael, welcome. 

There is absolutely no truth whatsoever to the rumor that we are 

stacking the Committee with Texans, but it just so happens this is 
797 

the newest Member. And we had a great position for him. His Subcommittees will be announced shortly. 

Michael, thanks. 

OK. If there’s no further discussion, that completes our business. 

This concludes the Science Committee markup. Without objection, 

the Committee stands adjourned. Thank you all. 

[Whereupon, at 10:23 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(799) 

Appendix: 

H.R. 6398, AMENDMENT ROSTER
800 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\DOE_ VETS.XML 

I 15TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION 

(Original Signature of l\Iember) 

H.R. 

To authorize the Department of Energy to conduct collaborative research 

with tlw Department of Veterans Affairs in order to improve healthcarc 

services for veterans in the United States, and for other purpose. 

IN THE HOUSE OF' REPRESENTATIVES 

M_. -·---------introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on 

A BILL 

To authorize the Department of Energy to conduct collaborative research ""ith the Department of Veterans Affairs 

in order to improve healthcare services for veterans in 

the United States, and for other purpose. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Department of Energy 

5 Veterans' Health Initiative Act". 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

7 In this Act: 

g:IVHLC\071318\071318.273.xml 

July 13,2018 (1:55 p.m.) 

(70181718) 
801 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\DOE_ VETS.XML 

2 

(1) DEPARTMENT.-The term "Department" 

2 means the Department of :Bjnergy. 

3 (2) NATIONAL LABORATORY.-The term "Na4 tiona! Laboratory" has the meaning given that term 

5 in section 2 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 ( 42 

6 U.S.C. 15801). 

7 (3) SECRETARY.-The term "Secretary" means 

8 the Secretary of Energy. 

9 SEC. 3. PURPOSES. 

10 The purposes of this Act are to advance Department 

11 of Energy expertise in artificial intelligence and hig·h per12 formance computing in order to improve health outcomes 

13 for veteran populations by14 (1} supporting basic research through the appli15 cation of artificial intellig·ence, high performance 

16 computing, modeling and simulation, machine learn17 ing, and large scale data analytics to identifY and 

18 solve outcome-defined challenges 1n the health 

19 sciences; 

20 (2) maximizing the impact of health and 

21 genomics data provided by the Department of Vet22 erans Mfairs, as well as other sources, on science, 

23 innovation, and health care outcomes through the 

24 use and advancement of artificial intelligence and 

g:\VHLC\071318\071318.273.xml 

July 13, 2018 (1 :55 p.m.) 

(70181718) 
802 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\DOE_ VETS.XML 

3 

1 high-performance computing capabilities of the De2 partment of Energy; 

3 (3) promoting collaborative research through 

4 the establishment of partnerships to improve data 

5 sharing between I<~ederal ag·encies, National Labora6 tories, institutions of higher education, and non7 profit institutions; 

8 ( 4) establishing multiple scientific computing 

9 user facilities to house and provision available data 

10 to foster transformational outcomes; and 

11 (5) driving the development of technology to im12 prove artificial intelligence, high performance com13 puting, and networking relevant to mission applica14 tions of the Department of Energy, including mod15 cling, simulation, machine learning, and advanced 

16 data anal;ytics. 

17 SEC. 4. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY VETERANS HEALm RE· 

18 SEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. 

19 (a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary shall establish and 

20 carry out a research program in artificial intelligence and 

21 high performance computing, focused on the development 

22 of tools to solve big data challenges associated with vet23 eran's healthcare, and to support the efforts of the De24 partment of Veterans Mfairs to identify potential health 

25 risks and challenges utilizing data on long term 

g:\VH LC\071318\071318.273.xml 

July 13, 2018 (1 :55 p.m.) 

(70181718) 
803 

G:\CMTE\SOISIDOE_ VETS.XML 

4 

1 healthcare, health risks, and genomic data eollected from 

2 veteran populations. The Secretary shall carry out this 

3 program through a competitive, merit-reviewed process, 

4 and consider applications from National lJaboratories, in5 stitutions of hig·her education, multi-institutional collabo6 rations, and other appropriate entities. 

7 (b) PROGR.AJ\1 CO!\IPONENTS.-In carrying out the 

8 program established under subsection (a), the Secretary 

9 may10 (1) conduct basic research in modeling and sim11 ulation, machine learning, large scale data analytics, 

12 and predictive analysis in order to develop novel or 

13 optimized algorithms for prediction of disease treat14 ment and recovery; 

15 (2) develop methods to accommodate large data 

16 sets with variable quality and scale, and to provide 

17 insight and models for complex systems; 

18 (3) develop new approaehes and maximize the 

19 use of algorithms developed through artifieial intel20 ligence, machine learning, data analytics, natural 

21 language processing, modeling and simulation, and 

22 develop new algorithms suitable for high perform23 ance computing systems and large biomedical data 

24 sets; 

g:\ VHLC\071318\071318.273.xml 

July 13, 2018 (1:55 p.m.) 

(70181718) 
804 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\DOE_ VETS.XML 

5 

1 ( 4) advance existing and construct new data en2 claves capable of securely storing· data sets provided 

3 by the Department of Veterans Mfairs, Department 

4 of Defense, and other sourceR; and 

5 ( 5) promote collaboration and data sharing be6 tween National Laboratories, research entities, and 

7 user facilities of the Department by providing the 

8 necessary access and secure data transfer capabili9 ties. 

10 (c) CoORDINATION.-In carrying out the program re11 quired under subsection (a), the Secretary is authorized 

12 to13 (1) enter into a memorandum of understanding 

14 with the Department of Veterans Affairs and other 

15 entities in order to maximize the effectiveness of De16 partment of Energy research and development to im17 prove veterans' healthcare; and 

18 (2) consult with the Department of Veterans 

19 Affairs and other Federal agencies as appropriate. 

20 (d) REPORT.-Not later than two years after the date 

21 of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit 

22 to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology and 

23 the Committee on Veterans' Mfairs of the House of Rep24 resentatives, and the Committee on Energy and Natural 

g:\ VHLC\071318\071318.273.xml 

July 13, 2018 (1:55 p.m.) 

(70181718) 
805 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\DOE_ VETS.XML 

6 

1 Resources and the Committee on Veterans' Affairs of the 

2 Senate, a report detailing the effectiveness of3 (1) the interagency coordination between each 

4 Federal agency involved in the research program 

5 carried out under this section; 

6 (2) collaborative research achievements of the 

7 program; and 

8 (3) potential opportunities to expand the tech9 nical capabilities of the Department. 

10 (c) FUNDING.-Thc Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

11 shall devote $27,000,000 to carry out this section for fis12 cal years 2019 and 2020, subject to the availability of ap13 propriations, to come from amounts made available for 

14 medical and prosthetic research. This section shall be earlS ried out using funds otherwise appropriated by law after 

16 the date of enactment of this Act. 

17 SEC. 5. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, DATA ANALYTICS, AND 

18 COMPUTATIONAL RESEARCH PILOT PRO19 GRAM. 

20 (a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary shall carry out a 

21 pilot program to develop tools for big data analytics by 

22 utilizing data sets generated by Federal agencies, institu23 tions of higher education, nonprofit research organiza24 tions, and industry in order to advance artificial intel25 ligence technologies to solve complex, big data challenges. 

g:\VHLC\071318107131 B.273.xml 

July 13, 2018 (1:55 p.m.) 

(70181718) 
806 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\DOE_ VETS.XML 

7 

1 The Secretary shall carry out this program through a com2 petitive, merit-reviewed process, and consider applications 

3 from National Laboratories, institutions of higher edu4 cation, multi-institutional collaborations, and other appro5 priate entities. 

6 (b) PROGRAM COMPOI\'ENTS.-In carrying out the 

7 pilot program established under subsection (a), the Sec8 retary may9 (1) establish a cross-cutting research initiative 

10 to prevent duplication and coordinate research ef11 forts in artificial intelligence and data analytics 

I 2 across the Department; 

13 (2) conduct basic research in modeling and sim14 ulation, artificial intelligence, machine learning, 

15 large scale data analytics, natural language proc16 essing, and predictive analysis in order to develop 

17 novel or optimized predictive albJ'Qrithms suitable for 

I 8 high performance computing systems and large bioI 9 medical data sets; 

20 (3) develop multivariate optimization models to 

21 accommodate large data sets with variable quality 

22 and scale in order to visualize complex systems; 

23 ( 4) establish multiple scientific computing user 

24 facilities to serve as data enclaves capable of se25 curely storing data sets created by Federal agencies, 

g:\VHLC\071318\071318.273.xml 

July 13, 2018 (1 :55 p.m.) 

(70181718) 
807 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\DOE_ VETS.XML 

8 

institutions of higher education, nonprofit organiza2 tions, or industry at National Laboratories; and 

3 ( 5) promote collaboration and data sharing be4 tween National l.Jaboratories, research entities, and 

5 user facilities of the Department by providing the 

6 necessary access and seeure data transfer capahili7 ties. 

8 (c) REPORT.-Not later than two years after the date 

9 of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit 

10 to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of 

11 the House of Representatives and the Committee on En12 ergy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report evaln13 atiug the effectiveness of the pilot program under sub14 section (a), including basic research discoveries achieved 

15 in the course of the program and potential opportunities 

16 to expand the technical capabilities of the Department 

17 through the development of artificial intelligence and data 

18 analytics technologies. 

19 (d) FUNDING.-For purposes of carrying out this 

20 section, the Secretary of Energy shall devote $52,000,000 

21 to carry out this section, which shall include $26,000,000 

22 for each fiscal years 2019 and 2020, subject to the avail23 ability of appropriations. This section shall be carried out 

24 using· funds otherwise appropriated by law after the date 

25 of enactment of this Act. 

g:\VHLC\071318\071318.273.xml 

July 13, 2018 {1 :55 p.m.) 

{70181718) 
808 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\DOE_ VETS.XML 

9 

1 SEC. 6. SPENDING LIMITATION. 

2 No additional funds are authorized to be appro3 priated to carry out this Act and the amendments made 

4 by this Act, and this Act and such amendments shall be 

5 carried out using amounts otherwise available for such 

6 purpose. 

g:\VHLC\071318\071318.273.xml 

July 13,2018 (1:55 p.m.) 

(70181718) 
809 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\ENERGY\DOE_ VETS_MGRSOI.XML 

AMENDMENT TO H.R. 

0FFEREDBYM 

[Page and line numbers refer to version of DOE_ VETS posted to Science, Space, and Technology committee website 

dated July 13, 2018 with a timestamp of 1:55PM.] 

Page 5, line 13, insert "in order to carry out a reimbursable agreement" after "memorandum of understanding". 

Page 6, line 11, strike "section for" and all that follows through "2020" on line 12 and insert the following: 

"section during fiscal years 2019 through 2023". 

g:\VHLC\071618\071618.493.xml 

July 16, 2018 (10:14 p.m.) 

(70326612) 

(811) 

PROCEEDINGS OF THE FULL COMMITTEE 

MARKUPS: S. 141, SPACE WEATHER 

RESEARCH AND FORECASTING ACT; 

AND H.R. 6468, 

IMPROVING SCIENCE IN 

CHEMICAL ASSESSMENTS ACT 

TUESDAY, JULY 24, 2018 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:55 p.m., in room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of the Committee at any time. 

Pursuant to Committee rule 2(e) and House rule XI(2)(h)(4), the 

Committee announces that he may postpone roll call votes. 

Today, we meet to consider S. 141, the Space Weather Research 

and Forecasting Act; and H.R. 6468, the Improving Science in 

Chemical Assessments Act. And I’ll recognize myself for an opening 

statement. 

Today, we meet to consider two bills primarily referred to the 

Science Committee. One is S. 141, the Space Weather Research and 

Forecasting Act. The Committee will consider an amendment in the 

nature of a substitute by Representative Perlmutter as base text. 

The Perlmutter-Brooks substitute requires the establishment of 

roles and responsibilities for Federal agencies within the Nation’s 

space weather enterprise. It codifies a formal approach to assessing 

and addressing the challenges posed by space weather in the areas 

of observation, forecasting, and response. 

Broadly speaking, space weather is the way the behavior of the 

sun and the nature of the Earth’s magnetic field and atmosphere 

interact. Space weather can affect the modern technology we rely 

upon daily. 

The electric grid, oil pipelines, passengers on commercial airlines, and satellites that provide telecommunications and GPS services can all be impacted by space weather. Depending on the severity of the event, these impacts can prove disastrous. As with terrestrial weather, without thorough monitoring and accurate modeling, 

we simply have no good way to predict space weather events and, 
812 

in turn, no ability to ensure that life and property are protected if 

severe events occur. 

While the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the U.S. Air 

Force currently monitor space weather, issue forecasts, and create 

other products to inform the public, space weather science, as a discipline, is still in its early stages. Without marked improvements 

in understanding the causes of space weather led by NASA and the 

ability to more accurately forecast and predict events, much of our 

modern technological infrastructure is at risk. 

The Perlmutter-Brooks substitute creates, for the first time, a 

formal national framework to leverage the capabilities and expertise of the government, commercial sector, academic community, 

and international partners. By tasking the National Space Council 

with overseeing this framework, this amendment sets out a strategy that is consistent with the current Administration’s approach 

to the management of space issues and raises the profile of space 

weather and the serious threat it poses. 

Additionally, this amendment codifies the reality of the threat 

posed by space weather and requires the establishment and maintenance of a baseline capability for space weather observation and 

forecasting. 

However, through the creation of a pilot program for the purchase of space weather data and services from the commercial sector, the substitute also ensures that innovative, cost-effective strategies can be pursued. And our burgeoning commercial space industry can help address the challenges posed by space weather. The 

Perlmutter-Brooks amendment will help us better prepare for, respond to, and recover from potential space weather events. 

The other is H.R. 6468, the Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act, introduced by Environment Subcommittee Chairman 

Andy Biggs, and cosponsored by Committee Vice Chairman Lucas, 

Environment Subcommittee Vice Chairman Norman, and Representatives Rohrabacher, Posey, Weber, Babin, Higgins, Lesko, 

Hultgren, Abraham, Webster, Marshall, and Dunn. 

This legislation amends the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Act to require any chemical hazard identification and dose response assessments previously conducted by 

the Integrated Risk Information System, or IRIS program, to be 

carried out by the relevant national program offices within the 

EPA. 

Since 2009, the Government Accountability Office and the National Academy of Sciences have raised multiple reports criticizing 

the IRIS program for a lack of transparency, procedural flaws, and 

improper science. This Committee held a hearing last September 

examining many of these problems and learning more about their 

impact on industry. Committee staff have held two briefings with 

the EPA to learn more about the practices and procedures of the 

IRIS program. 

Although much work has been done in recent years to address 

shortcomings in the program, the results just aren’t there. The 

time is ripe for an overhaul to bring the chemical assessment process at EPA back to its core mission of conducting complete and 

transparent scientific research as the foundation for regulatory de-
813 

cisions. This bill does just that by making agency science more useful to EPA program offices while increasing transparency and efficiency in the conduct of chemical assessments. 

H.R. 6468 requires the EPA to follow strict scientific standards 

in conducting hazard identification and dose response assessments. 

The bill requires the EPA to ensure the underlying scientific data 

is complete, relevant, and reproducible. It also explicitly requires 

the EPA to integrate all lines of scientific evidence, a suggestion 

made by the National Academies of Sciences in 2014. 

The EPA Office of Research and Development must certify that 

each chemical assessment completed by the relevant program offices meets the scientific standards in the legislation. Together, 

these improvements will increase the public’s confidence in the 

EPA’s chemical toxicity assessments by ensuring they are conducted using the best available science and are based on the weight 

of the evidence. 

Taken together, the two bills we consider today prioritize key 

programs and vital reforms within the Science Committee’s jurisdiction, though I should mention that the second bill also has joint 

jurisdiction with the Energy Committee, as John Shimkus just reminded me on the House floor a few minutes ago. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN SMITH

Today we meet to consider two bills primarily referred to the Science Committee. 

One is S. 141, the Space Weather Research and Forecasting Act. The committee 

will consider an amendment in the nature of a substitute by Rep. Perlmutter as 

base text. 

The Perlmutter-Brooks substitute requires the establishment of roles and responsibilities for federal agencies within the nation’s space weather enterprise. It codifies 

a formal approach to assessing and addressing the challenges posed by space weather in the areas of observation, forecasting, and response. 

Broadly speaking, space weather is the way the behavior of the sun and the nature of the Earth’s magnetic field and atmosphere interact. Space weather can affect 

the modern technology we rely upon daily. 

The electric grid, oil pipelines, passengers on commercial airlines, and satellites 

that provide telecommunications and GPS services can all be impacted by space 

weather. Depending on the severity of the event, these impacts can prove disastrous. As with terrestrial weather, without thorough monitoring and accurate modeling, we simply have no good way to predict space weather events and, in turn, 

no ability to ensure that life and property are protected if severe events occur. 

While the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the U.S. Air Force currently monitor space weather, issue forecasts, and create other products to inform 

the public, space weather science, as a discipline, is in its early stages. 

Without marked improvements in understanding the causes of space weather, led 

by NASA, and the ability to more accurately forecast and predict events, much of 

our modern technological infrastructure is at risk. 

The Perlmutter-Brooks substitute creates, for the first time, a formal national 

framework to leverage the capabilities and expertise of the government, commercial 

sector, academic community, and international partners. 

By tasking the National Space Council with overseeing this framework, this 

amendment sets out a strategy that is consistent with the current Administration’s 

approach to the management of space issues, and raises the profile of space weather 

and the serious threat it poses. 

Additionally, this amendment codifies the reality of the threat posed by space 

weather and requires the establishment and maintenance of a baseline capability 

for space weather observation and forecasting. 

However, through the creation of a pilot program for the purchase of space weather data and services from the commercial sector, the substitute also ensures that 

innovative, cost-effective strategies can be pursued. And our burgeoning commercial 

space industry can help address the challenges posed by space weather. 
814 

The Perlmutter-Brooks amendment will help us better prepare for, respond to, 

and recover from potential space weather events. 

The other is H.R. 6468, the Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act, introduced by Environment Subcommittee Chairman Andy Biggs, and co-sponsored by 

Committee Vice Chairman Lucas, Environment Subcommittee Vice Chairman Norman, and Representatives Rohrabacher, Posey, Weber, Babin, Higgins, Lesko, 

Hultgren, Abraham, Webster, Marshall, and Dunn. 

This legislation amends the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Act to require any chemical hazard identification and dose response assessments previously conducted by the Integrated Risk Information System, or 

‘‘IRIS’’ program, to be carried out by the relevant national program offices within 

the EPA. 

Since 2009, the Government Accountability Office and the National Academy of 

Sciences have issued multiple reports criticizing the IRIS program for a lack of 

transparency, procedural flaws, and improper science. 

This committee held a hearing last September examining many of these problems 

and learning more about their impact on industry. Committee staff have held two 

briefings with the EPA to learn more about the practices and procedures of the IRIS 

program. 

Although much work has been done in recent years to address shortcomings in 

the program, the results just aren’t there. The time is ripe for an overhaul to bring 

the chemical assessment process at EPA back to its core mission of conducting complete and transparent scientific research as the foundation for regulatory decisions. 

This bill does just that by making agency science more useful to EPA program offices while increasing transparency and efficiency in the conduct of chemical assessments. 

H.R. 6468 requires the EPA to follow strict scientific standards in conducting hazard identification and dose response assessments. The bill requires the EPA to ensure the underlying scientific data is complete, relevant, and reproducible. It also 

explicitly requires the EPA to integrate all lines of scientific evidence, a suggestion 

made by the National Academies of Sciences in 2014. 

The EPA Office of Research and Development must certify that each chemical assessment completed by the relevant program offices meets the scientific standards 

in the legislation. 

Together, these improvements will increase the public’s confidence in the EPA’s 

chemical toxicity assessments by ensuring they are conducted using the best available science and are based on the weight of the evidence. 

Taken together, the two bills we consider today prioritize key programs and vital 

reforms within the Science Committee’s jurisdiction. 

Chairman SMITH. I will now recognize the gentlewoman from 

Texas, the Ranking Member, for her opening statement. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and good 

afternoon to everyone. 

Today, we are marking up two bills, the Space Weather Research 

and Forecasting Act and the Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act. Before I speak on the specifics of the bills, I again want 

to take a moment to comment on the Committee’s dramatic turnaway from regular order. 

This markup was noticed on Friday afternoon when we left on 

Thursday, well after most Members were out of town. Moreover, 

since the markup is on a Tuesday, the amendment deadline was 

2 p.m. on Monday, which is before most Members are back in 

Washington. This hardly seems conducive to a Member participation in a markup. 

Then, on Saturday afternoon, another bill was added to the 

markup. This may be the least amount of notice I’ve ever received 

on a bill being marked up in the Science Committee. In fact, until 

last Congress, this would have broken the longstanding Committee 

notice requirements. However, Chairman Smith changed the rules 

to allow weekend days to count toward the notice requirements. 

On top of these issues, our Committee rarely holds legislative 

hearings, and we haven’t held a Subcommittee markup in years. 
815 

Bills are concocted in secret and thrown at the Committee Members with no real chance for meaningful review. The result is that 

Members are disenfranchised, and the work of this Committee suffers. We can do better than this. 

The first bill up in the—is the Space Weather Research and Forecasting Act. I will speak more about this in a minute when we consider it. However, I want to note how ridiculous it is to jam the 

Members of this Committee by noticing this bill over the weekend. 

The bill we are marking up, S. 141, was introduced in January 

2017. It was referred to our Committee in May 2017, which is well 

over a year ago. Mr. Perlmutter’s companion bill was introduced in 

June 2017. We could have considered these bills at any point in the 

past year instead of jamming the Members of this Committee with 

the late markup notice. 

This bill has been referred to four additional House Committees, 

so I suspect it is going nowhere in a hurry. In fact, it seems like 

this entire markup is a complete waste of our Members’ time. 

The next bill we’re marking up is a good example of the silliness 

that ensues when the Committee engages in these half-baked 

markups. We were supposed to mark this bill up last week. However, the majority had to pull the bill when it wasn’t even referred 

to our Committee, so here we are again. 

The bill appears to have been hastily drafted in secret without 

getting any feedback from the affected agencies or the affected community. On top of being sloppily drafted and poorly vetted, this bill 

is just plain bad. The bill would remove chemical assessments from 

EPA’s IRIS program and shift them to the separate program offices 

within the agency. Essentially, it is shutting down IRIS without explicitly saying so. The end results, perhaps surprisingly, is that the 

chemical assessments will be delayed and of worse quality than 

under the IRIS program. Ultimately, though, my greatest concern 

is the harm that will come to the Americans if this chemical assessments are undermined. 

That is why the bill is opposed by the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Environmental Defense Fund. They’ve written letters to the Committee expressing their opposition, and I ask that they may be made part 

of the record. 
816 

[CUnionof edSc" 0 oncem tentists 

July 17,2018 

ucsusa.org Two Brattle Square, Cambridge,MA 0.2138~3180 t6l7,547.5552 {617.864.9405 

1815 K Street NW, Suite 800, Washington, DC 20006~1232 t 202.223.6133 f202.2l3.6162 

2397 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 203, Berkeley, CA 94704·1567 t 510.843.187.2 f 510.843.3785 

One North LaSalle Street, Suite 1904, Chicago, IL 60602-4064 t 312.578.1750 f312.578.1751 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chair, House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

2321 Rayburn House Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member, House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

394 Ford House Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson: 

The Union of Concerned Scientists, with more than 500,000 members and supporters 

throughout the country, strongly opposes proposed legislation to alter the chemical 

assessment process at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

As drafted, the misleadingly named "Chemical Assessment Improvement Act" would 

eviscerate EPA's Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program, which 

conducts important risk assessments that represent the gold standard for chemical 

toxicity reviews. By essentially gutting the IRIS program through this ill-conceived 

legislative proposal, the committee would guarantee an information vacuum that 

would make it more difficult for federal, state, local, and international agencies to 

promulgate robust science-based public health policies and protections. 

Shifting the work of IRIS from EPA's Office ofResearch and Development (ORD) 

to the program areas within the agency would decrease the relative independence and 

effectiveness of the office and could result in hazard assessments that are not fully 

inclusive of all routes of exposure. The environmental contaminants that IRIS 

reviews are typically not limited to one route of exposure, so placing the burden of 

reviewing chemicals in one program area, regardless of whether it is the Office of 

Water, Office of Air and Radiation, Office of Land and Emergency Management, or 

Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, would likely result in a less than 

comprehensive toxicity review and assessment. 

Further, Section 3 of this bill would introduce opportunities for a steering committee 

chaired by a political appointee at EPA to decide whether to employ a third-party 

assessment, and to choose the author of the assessment. This would politicize what 

should be a completely science-based process and could result in the reliance on these 

Printed nn 100% post-consumer recycled paper 
817 

studies rather than completing rigorous in-house reviews which is what is already 

being done by the IRIS program. While there have been reports of political 

interference at IRIS, 1 this proposal would exacerbate the politicization of the 

chemical assessment process at EPA. The current structure of IRIS allows its 

scientific work to be independent of the influence of political appointees, and the 

program should remain that way to be the most effective. 

In addition, this bill aims to play up uncertainty in the science by emphasizing the 

need for non-linear approaches to dose-response modeling. This has been a longstanding goal of regulated industry and would result future chemical assessments that 

could downplay the health effects of toxic chemicals. The legislation, if passed, 

would also restrict the scientific studies that EPA can include in its hazard 

identification and dose response assessments to those that are publicly available and 

able to be replicated or reproduced. The concerns we have with these provisions echo 

those with the EPA's Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science proposed 

rule: it would make it significantly harder for EPA to use the best available science to 

protect the public. 2 

EPA's IRIS program has constantly been under attack by industry and some members 

of Congress. However, it is a program that has been and remains vital in ensuring 

science-based safeguards and deserving of your support. Its work has been recently 

recognized and commended by two independent scientific bodies, the National 

Academy of Sciences3 and the EPA Science Advisory Board. 4 UCS supports the 

conclusions of the National Academy of Sciences, specifically that the IRIS 

program's current systematic review process is both scientifically rigorous and 

transparent and that its current organizational structure at ORD is appropriate to 

maintain its independence. We urge you to reconsider this misguided legislative 

effort that would effectively end the IRIS program as we know it and vote no on the 

misguided "Chemical Assessment Improvement Act." 

Sincerely, 

Andrew A. Rosenberg, Ph.D. 

Director, Center for Science and Democracy 

Union of Concerned Scientists 

1 https:Uwww.politico.com/storv/2018/07/06/epa-formaldehyde-warnings-blocked-696628 

2 https://blog.ucsusa.org/andrew-rosenberglthe-epa-should-not-restrict-the-science-they-use-to-protect-

!!§ 

3 https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25086/progress-toward-transforming-the-integrated-risk-inforrnationsystern-iris-program 

4

https://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/ A9 A9 ACCE42B6AAOE8525818E004CC597/$File/EP ASAB-l7-008.pdf 
818 

July 17, 2018 

Dear Representative, 

On behalf of our millions of members and supporters, the Natural Resources Defense Council urges 

you to oppose the Chemical Assessment Improvement Act. Rather than improving EPA's 

information about toxic chemicals, this chemical industry supported bill would undermine the 

scope and reliability of EPA's chemical hazard assessments. It would replace the current robust, 

comprehensive and publicly vetted system with a fragmented and unprotective approach that will 

result in weaker protections from air pollution, contaminated drinking water and toxic chemicals in 

products. 

The Chemical Assessment Improvement Act would dismantle EPA's Integrated Risk Information 

System [IRIS), which develops chemical hazard profiles using a credible and publicly vetted process 

that has earned it high praise from the Agency's Scientific Advisory Board and by the National 

Academies (NAS 2014; NAS 2018). Hazard is an inherent property of a chemical- that is, it doesn't 

change with changing context. Dynamite is explosive, asbestos causes cancer, mercury and lead are 

neurotoxic. This information is then paired with contextual information such as a site-specific 

superfund clean-up or a drinking water public health goal to generate meaningful risk estimates to 

protect the public. 

With the IRIS assessment, regulators and others can ask many diverse questions relevant to 

individual EPA programs, non-regulatory programs, and even industry and non-government 

programs. Having a central IRIS Program to provide chemical hazard assessments to other EPA 

programs is thus a wise use of resources, avoids duplicating work, and most importantly- avoids 

incomplete or misleading assessments based on partial information or generated through a partial 

process. Dismantling IRIS would silo information and resources without ever completing a 

comprehensive chemical hazard profile, resulting in less information with which to protect the 

public. 

The bill would take IRIS out of the EPA science office, and scatter its core functions among 

narrowly focused regulatory offices- exactly what the National Academies just cautioned against: 

"the IRIS teams involved in the systematic-review process should be independent of those involved 

in regulatory decision-making who use the products of the systematic-review teams. The 

committee notes that the current organizational structure of the IRIS program in the EPA Office of 

Research and Development is consistent with those best practices."(NAS, 2018) 

In fact, the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention -under the direction of a former 

chemical industry lobbyist-- is already proposing systematic review methods that, if adopted 

would put a thumb on the scale in support of disregarding chemical hazards. 

NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL 

1151 15TH STREET NW I WASHINGTON, OC 20005 I T 202.289.6868 I F 101.289.1060 I NROC.ORG 
819 

Finally, the bill requires consideration of "third party assessments"- meaning industry evaluations 

of its own chemical products. But requiring consideration of the chemical industry's selfassessments will not benefit EPA or the public. In fact, under President GW Bush the IRIS program 

did invite some third-party assessments (vinyl chloride, butadiene, styrene), and they all failed EPA 

review. The invitation was rescinded, and the EPA Science Advisor at the time was quoted saying 

that EPA staff was doing more work to try to fix the broken assessments than to generate them in 

the first place." [I]t is taking staff as much or more time to work with the outside parties as it does 

to develop in house toxicological reviews, [Paul] Gilman said. To date, the process has not saved the 

time or resources it was designed to save." (Phibbs 2002; Sass et al. 2005) 

Americans deserve to be safe from harmful chemicals at work and at home. To achieve this, they 

need complete and credible information. The Chemical Assessment Improvement Act would rob the 

public of this vital information, undermine independence and introduce bias against regulating 

toxic chemicals into a system that should be protecting Americans. The House Science Committee 

should be following the recommendations of the NAS, not the chemical industry. We urge you once 

again to oppose this bill. 

Sincerely 

jennifer Sass, 

Senior Scientist 

Natural Resources Defense Council 
820 

EDF 

ENVIRONMENTAL 

DEFENSE FUND" 

Finding the ways that work 

July 24, 2018 

The Honorable Lamar Smith 

Chairman 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

The Honorable Eddie Bernice Johnson 

Ranking Member 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Washington, D.C. 20515 

Dear Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson, 

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) strongly opposes the Improving Science in Chemical 

Assessments Act being marked up by the full committee on July 24, 2018. This bill is an attempt to 

dismantle the vitally important Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program at the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-stripping away a core scientific function of the agency 

that serves to protect public health. 

The IRIS program is a non-regulatory program within EPA's Office of Research and Development 

(ORD) National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA) that provides critical chemical 

hazard information to support a variety of public health decision-making needs inside and outside 

the agency. EPA program and regional offices as well as other federal, state, and local authorities 

rely on IRIS chemical human health hazard assessments, or toxicological reviews, to characterize 

and ultimately manage risks of toxic chemicals present in our air, water, land, and in the products 

we encounter in our everyday lives. 

The Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act would transfer the development of chemical 

toxicological reviews out of the IRIS program and into agency program offices that lack the full 

complement of specialized expertise provided by the scientific staff of the IRIS program and 

-----··----· ---

1875 Connecticut Avenue, Nl/ll T 202 387 3500 New York, NY I Au$tin, 1X/Bentonville, AR/Boston, MA/Bou!dor, CO/ Raleigh, NC 

Washington, DC 20009 F 202 234 6049 Sacramento, CA./ San Francisco, CA I Washington, DC I Beijing, China I La Paz, Mexlco 

edf.org TotallyohlorlMfrea100%post-conS~JmerrecyclodpaPf!r 
821 

broader NCEA. Likewise, the bill gives no consideration to the substantial additional workload and 

resource drain the program offices would incur as a result. 

Indeed, the bill appears to ignore key factors that motivated the inception ofthe IRIS program 

originally and that are still relevant today. These include creating efficiency in the development of 

chemical assessments at the agency, in part by playing a coordinating role; supporting scientific 

consistency in the development of chemical assessments; and providing independence between the 

scientific review of chemicals and regulatory decisions informed by those reviews. 

With regard to efficiency, the bill would establish a "chemical hazard identification and dose 

response" steering committee to coordinate assessments and avoid duplication of efforts. However, 

the IRIS program currently provides this function from the scientifically advantageous and sensible 

vantage ofORD. 

With regard to supporting scientific consistency, EPA's website notes, "The IRIS Program was 

created by EPA in 198S to provide an internal database of human health assessments for chemicals 

found in the environment. The goal of the IRIS Program was to foster consistency in the evaluation 

of chemical toxicity across the Agency. Since then, the IRIS Program has become an important 

public resource as well.''l It is worth nothing that the IRIS program is responsible for spearheading 

the advent of systematic review in the development of chemical assessments at EPA. Born out of the 

clinical sciences, systematic review employs structured approaches to evidence identification, 

evaluation, and synthesis in a manner that promotes scientific rigor, consistency, transparency, 

objectivity, and reduction of bias.2 IRIS is a leader in the application of systematic review in 

environmental health, and through its assessments, IRIS is building institutional proficiency and 

capacity at the agency in this area. 

With regard to the importance of scientific independence, EPA's website states, "The placement of 

the IRIS Program in ORD is intentional. It ensures that IRIS can develop impartial toxicity 

information independent of its use by EPA's program and regional offices to set national standards 

and clean up hazardous sites.''3 

This bill has a number of provisions that could result in a weakening of scientific independence and 

integrity in the development of chemical assessments. For instance, the bill allows third parties to 

submit covered chemical assessments, an opportunity that undoubtedly will be used primarily by 

industry, raising significant conflict of interest concerns. The bill also promotes the development of 

a range of toxicity values for a chemical, deviating from the current practice of single toxicity values. 

This provision would lead to disparate risk management decisions as different regulators could 

choose different toxicity values to inform their decisions. Moreover, effective use of ranges of 

toxicity values requires a level of expertise and expert judgment that risk managers on the ground 

may not have. 

1 htt;ps: //www.epa.gov /iris /basic· information-about-integrated-risk-information-system 

'https:l/ehp.niehs nih.gov/1307175/ 3 https://www.epa.gov/iris/basic-inforrnation-about·integrated-risk-information-system 
822 

Section 4 of the bill includes a list of scientific considerations to be used in the development of 

covered assessments. Many of these raise red flags. For example, sections 4(3) and 4(6) introduce 

the possibility that a high quality scientific study may be excluded from use in an assessment unless 

its underlying data are publicly available or unless the study has been repeated. Section 4(7) 

dictates expectations for how dose-response modeling is to be performed in a manner that is at 

odds with conventional, health protective approaches. These scientific considerations mirror 

troubling issues raised in EPA's "Strengthening Transparency in Regulatory Science" proposed 

rule,• a hugely problematic and widely criticized proposaLS 

IRIS has received high marks from the National Academies in its most recent 20146 and 2018' 

reviews of the program. The program has also received praise from EPA's Scientific Advisory 

Board.8 Despite this, and despite the enormous reliance on the program from all levels of 

government, there have been numerous attempts to dismantle IRIS by segments of industry, 

political leadership at EPA, and some members of Congress. 

EDF has deep concerns with the bill you are marking up today, and we strongly affirm the 

significance of the IRIS program's work. The IRIS program serves the needs of not only program 

offices at EPA. but also the needs of its regional offices, other federal agencies, states, local 

government, and tribes. Indeed, a recent letter from the Environmental Council of States to 

Congress noted, "The IRIS Program's identification and characterization of chemical health hazards 

plays a vital role in states' efforts to protect their residents and environments against harmful toxic 

exposures.''• IRIS plays a critical role in ensuring regulatory decisions are based on sound science, 

serving the best interests of the public. We strongly urge the committee to vote against the 

Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act. 

Sincerely, 

jennifer McPartland, PhD 

Senior Scientist, Health Program 

Environmental Defense Fund 

4 https: llwww epa.gov /osa/strengthenjng-transparency-regulatory-science 5 http:f/blog,s.edf.org/health/2018/07/17/edf-calls-on-epa-wjthdraw-censored-science/ 

6 https·//www.nap edu/catalog/18794/reyjew-of-epas-integrated-risk-informatjon-system-irjs-process 7 http://wwwB.nationalacademies org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?Record!D-25086 8 https: I /yosemite.epa.goy/sab/sabproduct.nsf/0/A9A9ACCE42B6AAO E852 5818E004CCS 9 7 /$File/EPASAB-17 -OOB.pdf 9 https://www.ecos.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/0311RIS-Letter.pdf 
823 

This really is a bad bill that will ultimately result in bad science 

and sick people. I urge all of my colleagues to oppose it. 

I thank you and yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MS. JOHNSON

Thank you, Chairman Smith, and good afternoon to everyone. Today we are marking up two bills: The Space Weather Research and Forecasting Act and the Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act. Before I speak on the specifics of the bills, I again want to take a moment to comment on the Committee’s dramatic turn away from regular order. This markup was 

noticed on Friday afternoon, well after most Members had left town. Moreover, since 

the markup is on a Tuesday, the amendment deadline was at 2pm Monday- which 

is before most Members are back in Washington. This hardly seems conducive to 

Member participation in the markup. 

Then on Saturday afternoon, another bill was added to the markup. This may be 

the least amount of notice I have ever received of a bill being marked up in the 

Science Committee. In fact, until last Congress, this would have broken the longstanding Committee notice requirements. However, Chairman Smith changed the 

rules to allow weekend days to count toward the notice requirements. 

On top of these issues, our Committee rarely holds legislative hearings, and we 

haven’t held a subcommittee markup in years. Bills are concocted in secret and 

thrown at Committee Members with no real chance for meaningful review. The result is that Members are disenfranchised and the work of this Committee suffers. 

We can do better than this. 

The first bill up is the Space Weather Research and Forecasting Act. I will speak 

more about this in a minute when we consider it. However, I want to note how ridiculous it is to jam the Members of this Committee by noticing this bill over the weekend. 

The bill we are marking up, S. 141, was introduced in January of 2017. It was 

referred to our Committee in May of 2017, which is well over a year ago. Mr. 

Perlmutter’s companion bill was introduced in June of 2017. We could have considered these bills at any point in the past year instead of jamming the Members of 

this Committee with a late markup notice. 

This bill has been referred to four additional House committees, so I suspect it 

is going nowhere in a hurry. In fact, it seems like this entire markup is a complete 

waste of our Members time. The next bill we are marking up is a good example of 

the silliness that ensues when the Committee engages in these half-baked markups. 

We were supposed to mark this bill up last week. However, the Majority had to pull 

the bill when it wasn’t even referred to our Committee. So here we are to try again. 

The bill appears to have been hastily drafted in secret, without getting any feedback from the affected agency or affected community. On top of being sloppily drafted and poorly vetted, this bill is just plain bad. 

The bill would remove chemical assessments from the EPA’s IRIS program and 

shift them to the separate program offices within the agency. Essentially, it shuts 

down IRIS without explicitly saying so. The end result, perhaps unsurprisingly, is 

that chemical assessments will be delayed and of worse quality than under the IRIS 

program. 

Ultimately though, my greatest concern is the harm that will come to Americans 

if these chemical assessments are undermined. That is why the bill is opposed by 

the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the 

Environmental Defense Fund. They have written letters to the committee expressing their opposition, and I ask that they be made a part of the record. 

This is a bad bill that will ultimately result in bad science and sick people. I urge 

all of my colleagues to oppose it. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

I’ll recognize myself for a minute. 

I just want to give Members a complete picture about why we 

had a weekend notice of particularly the weather bill. Other Members can respond to the merits or demerits of the bills and the substance of the bills. 

But the bill that we talked about over the weekend and I talked 

to Mr. Perlmutter about it at least once or twice and we exchanged 

other messages, I talked to Senator Peters about the space weather 
824 

bill over the weekend, and we exchanged several messages. And 

this was all in an effort to try to keep, frankly, a commitment I 

made to Mr. Perlmutter and the Senator to mark up this bill before 

we broke for our August recess. So we bent over backward over the 

weekend to make sure that we were ready for markup, and I’m a 

little surprised to hear the Ranking Member complain about a 

Democratic bill over which we put in a lot of—into which we put 

in a lot of effort so that we would be prepared to mark it up today. 

So I just want, again, Members to have a full picture of the space 

weather bill and why that weekend notice was necessary. 

S. 141 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up S. 141, the 

Space Weather Research and Forecasting Act. And the clerk will report the bill. 

The CLERK. S. 141, an act to improve understanding and forecasting of space weather events and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill is considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point. And we will now proceed with consideration of amendments in the order listed in the 

roster. 

And I now recognize the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. 

Perlmutter, to offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute. 

And does the gentleman have an amendment at the desk? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute to Senate Bill 141 at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. And the clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment in the nature of a substitute to S. 141 

offered by Mr. Perlmutter of Colorado, amendment number ANS– 

01. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read and will serve as base text for purposes of amendment. 

The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter, is recognized for 

5 minutes on his amendment. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I am very 

pleased we’re here today to finally mark up legislation on space 

weather. And the Ranking Member is correct. This has—this subject has been hanging around now for at least a year. 

Space weather is electromagnetic activity from the sun. It’s radiation, it’s flares, it’s eruptions, and it can have significant societal, 

economic, national security, and health implications both here on 

Earth, as well as in space. 

Almost 3 years ago, Dr. Dan Baker from the University of Colorado Boulder testified in front of this Committee about the dangers 

of space weather events on our electrical grid. At that hearing, he 

said, ‘‘Had an observed July 2012 space weather event actually hit 

the Earth, we would still be picking up the pieces.’’ That testimony 

stuck with me, and when Senators Gary Peters and Cory Gardner 

introduced a Space Weather Research and Forecasting Act a few 

months later, I was eager to start working on a House companion 

bill. 

Last year, Senate Bill 141 passed the Senate by unanimous consent, and I introduced the House companion with a few additions 
825 

to that text with then-Representative Jim Bridenstine as my Republican cosponsor. Since last summer, I’ve been reminding and 

bugging the Chairman of my interest in the topic and calling for 

a hearing, and, good to his word, we had that hearing in April. And 

I thought all of the Members who participated in that hearing were 

engaged and interested in taking action. 

After that hearing in April, I worked with Chairman Smith and 

my new lead Republican cosponsor, Representative Mo Brooks, to 

agree on legislative text the Chairman could support and which 

moves the ball forward on this subject. That is the text reflected 

in my amendment today. 

This legislation will better coordinate Federal research investments with forecasters who provide warnings to affected industries 

and to ensure the academic community and commercial sector work 

hand-in-hand to improve space weather forecasting. This text takes 

a different approach about how to meet these goals than the Senate-passed bill, but with this shared goal in mind, it is another step 

toward getting space weather legislation signed into law this year. 

This amendment builds upon the work done in 2015 under the 

Obama Administration and tasks the National Space Council and 

a newly created National Committee for Space Weather Observation and Forecasting with developing our national space weather 

priorities. It also requires the Office of Science and Technology Policy to develop a national space weather research roadmap to coordinate Federal research on space weather. 

We found in the hearing—it showed that the commercial sector, 

the academic sector, and the Federal sector were all working kind 

of in silos and not collaborating in the way that would best serve 

all of us as Americans. 

Throughout the bill, Federal agencies will be required to collaborate more with the academic community and the commercial sector, 

one of the driving factors behind the legislation. The bill also sets 

up formal mechanisms to help break down barriers between the research community and operational forecasters by encouraging sharing of information and requirements to improve the pipeline of new 

observations, technologies, models, and forecasts. 

Today’s markup is certainly not the end of the conversation. 

There were multiple referrals, and one of the desires—and I think 

as accomplished by the substitute—is to eliminate some if not all 

of the referrals. 

Over the coming months, we will all have to work together, 

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson, Representative 

Brooks, along with the Senators Peters, Gardner, Thune, and Nelson from the Senate Commerce Committee. I’m confident we can 

take the two versions of this legislation and agree on a final text, 

which will pass the House and the Senate to be signed into law 

later this year. 

I look forward to this continued dialog and the input we’ll receive 

from the space weather community in the coming months. 

I want to thank Representative Brooks for his help and for 

Chairman Smith for working with me. 

I’d also like to thank the Ranking Member for her support of 

H.R. 3086 and strong collaborative legislation on space weather. 

With that, I yield back. 
826 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Perlmutter. 

The gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Brooks, is recognized for his 

comments on the amendment. 

Mr. BROOKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for bringing this legislation, the Perlmutter-Brooks amendment in the nature of a substitute up for Committee consideration today. 

Space weather is an important issue because the consequences of 

a severe space weather event can be far-reaching and disastrous. 

The Perlmutter-Brooks amendment helps to establish a formal 

space weather observation and forecasting architecture that, hopefully, will help mitigate the harmful consequences of space weather 

to life and property on Earth and in space. 

Space weather is a collection of physical processes, beginning at 

the sun with solar winds and ultimately affecting human activities 

on Earth and in space. Solar winds and their interaction with 

Earth’s atmosphere are not as understood as they should be. Fortunately, numerous people and organizations are changing this. Scientists and engineers at Marshall Space Flight Center in my district have been at the forefront of this vital research for many 

years. Under the Perlmutter-Brooks amendment, their research 

will not only continue but improve so as to help advance the Nation’s space weather knowledge to where it needs to be. 

I thank my colleague, Mr. Perlmutter, for the leadership on 

space weather and his partnership on this amendment. I urge my 

colleagues to vote for it. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. BROOKS

Mr. Chairman, thank you for bringing this legislation and the Perlmutter-Brooks 

amendment in the nature of a substitute up for Committee consideration today. 

Space weather is an important issue because the consequences of a severe space 

weather event can be far-reaching and disastrous. The PerlmutterBrooks amendment helps to establish a formal space weather observation and forecasting architecture that, hopefully, will help mitigate the harmful consequences of space weather 

to life and property on Earth and in space. 

Space weather is a collection of physical processes, beginning at the Sun with 

solar winds and ultimately affecting human activities on Earth and in space. Solar 

winds and their interaction with Earth’s atmosphere are not as understood as they 

should be. Fortunately, numerous people and organizations are changing this. Scientists and engineers at Marshall Space Flight Center, in my district, have been at 

the forefront of this vital research for many years. Under the Perlmutter-Brooks 

amendment, their research will not only continue, but improve so as to help advance 

the nation’s space weather knowledge to where it needs to be. 

I thank my colleague, Mr. Perlmutter, for his leadership on space weather and 

his partnership on this amendment. I urge my colleagues to vote for it. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Brooks. 

And I’ll recognize myself to speak on the amendment as well. 

And, first of all, I want to thank Mr. Perlmutter and Mr. Brooks 

for their hard work on this issue and urge my colleagues to support 

this bipartisan substitute to S. 141. 

Their initiative for the safety and security of the American people and economy is welcome. The Perlmutter-Brooks amendment in 

the nature of a substitute will further the goals of S. 141 and better address the complex challenges posed by space weather and 

space weather events. By establishing a national coordinating 

framework and providing ways for the commercial sector, academic 

community, and international partners to contribute in innovative, 
827 

meaningful, and cost-saving ways, the amendment not only advances space weather observation and forecasting capabilities but 

also increases the vigor of the national space enterprise on the 

whole. 

Again, I especially appreciate Mr. Perlmutter’s efforts to move 

this legislation forward. 

Does the gentleman from Colorado seek to be recognized again? 

With—— 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I—— 

Chairman SMITH. With no objection, the gentleman is recognized. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. I have—I think this is where I do it. I have 

an amendment to the substitute amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. If you’ll give me 10 seconds—— 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Oh, sorry. 

Chairman SMITH [continuing]. We’re on the way there. 

The next amendment on the roster is a manager’s amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter. And does 

the—I know the gentleman seeks to be recognized, and he is so recognized. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment 

to the substitute amendment at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment to the Perlmutter amendment in the nature of a substitute to S. 141 offered by Mr. Perlmutter of Colorado, 

amendment number 002. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read, and the gentleman is recognized to explain that 

amendment. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And the Ranking Member was correct. Things were moving very 

quickly this weekend with conversations between me and the 

Chairman, Senators Gardner and Peters, about the changes that 

we have proposed in the substitute amendment. And we’ve got a 

couple other changes to the bill text that we worked on over the 

weekend. 

So, in addition, there are technical changes to the amendment 

that will ensure that NOAA, NASA, and the NSF support both 

basic applied and research to improve the space weather forecasting. The amendment that I’m proposing now also requirements 

the priorities and plans under the bill to be reevaluated and updated at least every 4 years or more frequently, as deemed necessary by the Administration. 

The amendment also makes clear the importance of space weather data and forecasting to successful deep-space exploration, which 

was suggested by Representative Brooks and is clearly a very important facet of the space weather legislation we’re proposing. 

I encourage all my colleagues to support the amendment to the 

substitute amendment, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Perlmutter. 

And the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Brooks, is recognized. 

Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Chairman, I support the manager’s amendment 

to the Perlmutter-Brooks amendment in the nature of a substitute. 

This amendment brings commonsense additions to the PerlmutterBrooks amendment. One in particular merits emphasis. It’s explic-
828 

itly outlining the importance of space weather observation and 

forecasting to deep-space exploration. This manager’s amendment 

makes it clear that not only can space weather impact us on the 

terrestrial frontier, Earth, but it can and will impact us in deepspace exploration as well. 

I encourage my colleagues to vote for the manager’s amendment, 

as well as the underlying Perlmutter-Brooks amendment in the nature of a substitute to Senate S. 141. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. And thank you, Mr. Brooks. 

And the Ranking Member, Ms. Johnson, is recognized. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I do not oppose this manager’s amendment. However, it is worth 

noting that we apparently need a 3-page manager’s amendment to 

perfect an amendment in the nature of a substitute that was noticed 3 days ago. This just reinforces my opinion that our Committee has rushed to a poorly—to a markup of a poorly vetted piece 

of legislation. 

I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

And the gentleman from California, Mr. Rohrabacher, is recognized. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Today, we recognize the enormous impact that the sun has on 

the Earth, and today, we’re focusing of course on the powerful danger that any type of hiccup on the sun could cause enormous damage here. 

Let us just note the sun also—well, many of us believe has the— 

is the deciding factor as to what our climate will be like on the 

Earth. And this impact should not be ignored when we are debating the various issues that come before this Committee, and I just 

thought I would point out how important the sun is. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher. 

The last amendment on the roster is an amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by the Ranking Member, Ms. Johnson, 

and she is recognized for that purpose. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment 

at the desk. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the amendment. 

The CLERK. Amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by 

Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas to the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by Mr. Perlmutter of Colorado, amendment number 035. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the amendment is considered as read and the Ranking Member is recognized to explain her 

amendment. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

My amendment is very straightforward. The text of this amendment is drawn from the bipartisan Space Weather Research and 

Forecasting Act, H.R. 3086. This bill was introduced by my colleague from Colorado, Mr. Perlmutter, and I was the original cosponsor. It was also cosponsored by current NASA Administration, 

Mr. Jim Bridenstine, before he left the House. 
829 

The legislation was drafted in a bipartisan fashion with minority 

Committee staff involvement, unlike the amendment in the nature 

of a substitute being offered today by Mr. Perlmutter that neither 

I nor the staff saw until negotiations had already been completed. 

This bill builds on the Senate-passed space weather legislation 

that we’re marking up today with some additional improvements. 

These improvements include strengthening international, commercial, and academic collaboration and research to operations activities, incorporation of the National Academies’ decadal survey recommendations, and providing for research in behavioral, economic, 

and social sciences for the improved national preparedness for 

space weather events. 

In particular, this bill directs NOAA Administrator to enter into 

an agreement with the National Academies to establish a space 

weather government-industry-university roundtable to bring the 

various stakeholders together to facilitate communication and the 

transfer of knowledge, language that was widely supported by the 

community. 

Many groups are supportive of H.R. 3086, including academia, 

scientific societies, and the commercial sector. I’d like to contrast 

this amendment with the amendment in the nature of a substitute 

noticed this past Saturday. 

The text of my amendment has been vetted by the outside community for well over a year versus 3 days for the ANS. In fact, my 

staff found out that NOAA Legislative Affairs had not even been 

given a copy of the ANS until we reached out to them yesterday 

afternoon. 

NOAA is one of the agencies most affected by this bill. 

Our Committee held a hearing on space weather in April where 

H.R. 3086 was endorsed by the expert witnesses. We’ve had no 

hearings on the ANS because we’ve only just received it. My 

amendment also more closely resembles Senator Peters’ Senate 

companion bill, which has already received unanimous support 

from the other body. 

All of this suggests that my amendment represents a better and 

more rigorous thought-out policy choice than the ANS noticed this 

past weekend. Given the Senate’s prior support of S. 141, I think 

adopting my amendment would also make it more likely that we 

can actually get a good bill enacted into law, which should be our 

goal as legislators. 

I think we ought to be supporting the best policy in this Committee, and I hope my colleagues will do that today and support 

this amendment. 

Thank you, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

I’ll recognize myself in opposition to the amendment. 

On April 26, the Subcommittees on Environment and Space held 

a hearing titled ‘‘Surveying the Space Weather Landscape’’ in 

which Members learned about the potential negative impacts of 

space weather events and the current State of research, forecasting, and preparedness efforts related to space weather. 

The Committee’s position was always that more knowledge was 

needed before acting legislatively, and consideration of today’s leg-
830 

islation, which comes just over 3 months after the initial April 

hearing, is entirely consistent with that position. 

Shortly after the April 26 hearing, Mr. Perlmutter began moving 

the ball forward on space weather legislation in a constructive, bipartisan manner. Mr. Perlmutter and his staff undertook proactive, 

good-faith negotiations and worked closely with the Committee in 

crafting the consensus text of the Perlmutter-Brooks amendment 

before us today. The Perlmutter-Brooks amendment in the nature 

of a substitute is a culmination of a rigorous bipartisan negotiation 

and represents a substantive good-faith effort to address a serious 

issue. 

The amendment offered by the Ranking Member would reject 

those efforts, so I encourage my colleagues to vote against this 

amendment. 

Does anyone else seek to be recognized? 

The gentleman from Colorado. 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

And I can’t dispute the Ranking Member’s complaint that things 

really did accelerate over the course of the last few weeks, but on 

the other hand, we have been negotiating. My office has been negotiating with the Chairman and the Committee staff. We’ve been 

working on this. It really accelerated—all of this really accelerated 

over the weekend. Much of what’s in House Resolution 3086 is in 

the substitute amendment, and there still is a long way to go to 

resolve this. And I appreciate the critiques by the Ranking Member, and I like 3086 better than my substitute amendment, but reality is that this is what we agreed on, and this is what I agreed 

on with Representative Brooks and with the Chairman and with 

the—Senator Peters so that we could advance this legislation and 

have it go through further conversation and negotiation as it goes 

through the process. So I like my bill, but I’ll probably have to vote 

against it because I agreed on this substitute motion. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Perlmutter, for those comments. 

Does anyone else seek to be recognized? 

If not, we have a series of amendments to vote on. And if there 

are no further amendments, the question is on agreeing to the 

manager’s amendment offered by the gentleman from Colorado, 

Mr. Perlmutter. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed to. 

The question is now on agreeing to the amendment in the nature 

of a substitute offered by the Ranking Member, Ms. Johnson. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Record vote. 

Chairman SMITH. All in favor, say aye. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Record vote, please. 

Chairman SMITH. I understand. The record vote has been requested, and the clerk will call the roll. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith? 

Chairman SMITH. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith votes no. 

Mr. Lucas? 

Mr. LUCAS. No. 
831 

The CLERK. Mr. Lucas votes no. 

Mr. Rohrabacher? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Rohrabacher votes no. 

Mr. Brooks? 

Mr. BROOKS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Brooks votes no. 

Mr. Hultgren? 

Mr. HULTGREN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Hultgren votes no. 

Mr. Posey? 

Mr. POSEY. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Posey votes no. 

Mr. Massie? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber? 

Mr. WEBER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber votes no. 

Mr. Knight? 

Mr. KNIGHT. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Knight votes no. 

Mr. Babin? 

Mr. BABIN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Babin votes no. 

Mrs. Comstock? 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. No. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Comstock votes no. 

Mr. Loudermilk? 

Mr. LOUDERMILK. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Loudermilk votes no. 

Mr. Abraham? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Palmer? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Webster? 

Mr. WEBSTER. Nay. 

The CLERK. Mr. Webster votes no? Thank you. 

Mr. Biggs? 

Mr. BIGGS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Biggs votes no. 

Mr. Marshall? 

Mr. MARSHALL. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Marshall votes no. 

Mr. Dunn? 

Mr. DUNN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Dunn votes no. 

Mr. Higgins? 

Mr. HIGGINS. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Higgins votes no. 

Mr. Norman? 

Mr. NORMAN. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Norman votes no. 

Mrs. Lesko? 

Mrs. LESKO. No. 
832 

The CLERK. Mrs. Lesko votes no. 

Mr. Cloud? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson? 

Ms. JOHNSON. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson votes yes. 

Ms. Lofgren? 

Ms. LOFGREN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Lofgren votes yes. 

Mr. Lipinski? 

Mr. LIPINSKI. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lipinski votes yes. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Bera? 

Mr. BERA. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Bera votes yes. 

Ms. Esty? 

Ms. ESTY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Esty votes yes. 

Mr. Veasey? 

Mr. VEASEY. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Veasey votes yes. 

Mr. Beyer? 

Mr. BEYER. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Beyer votes yes. 

Ms. Rosen? 

Ms. ROSEN. Aye. 

The CLERK. Ms. Rosen votes yes. 

Mr. Lamb? 

Mr. LAMB. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lamb votes yes. 

Mr. McNerney? 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. McNerney votes yes. 

Mr. Perlmutter? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Perlmutter votes no. 

Mr. Tonko? 

Mr. TONKO. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Tonko votes yes. 

Mr. Foster? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Takano? 

Mr. TAKANO. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Takano votes yes. 

Ms. Hanabusa? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Crist? 

Mr. CRIST. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Crist votes yes. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the vote. 

The CLERK. Mr. Chairman, 13 Members voted aye, 19 Members 

voted nay. 
833 

Chairman SMITH. The nays have it and the amendment is not 

agreed to. 
834 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY ·1151

h 

Full Committee Roll Call 

Working Quorum: 13 Reporting Quorum: 20 

DATE: July 24,2018 

Bill: S.141 AMENDMENT NO. 035 

ROLL CALL NO. 1 

Amendment Sponsor: Rep. Eddie Bemice Johnson DEFEATED 

MEMBER AYE NO PRESENT NOT VOTING 

1 Mr. SMITH Chair- TX X 

2 Mr. LUCAS - OK ** X 

3 Mr. ROHRABACHER- CA X 

4 Mr. BROOKS- AL X 

5 Mr. HULTGREN -IL X 

6 Mr. POSEY- FL X 

7 Mr. MASSIE - KY 

8 Mr. WEBER- TX X 

9 Mr. KNIGHT - CA X 

10 Mr. BABIN - TX X 

11 Mrs. COMSTOCK- VA X 

12 Mr. LOUDERMILK - GA X 

13 Mr. ABRAHAM - LA 

14 Mr. PALMER- AL 

15 Mr. WEBSTER- FL X 

16 Mr. BIGGS - AZ X 

17 Mr. MARSHALL - KS X 

18 Mr. DUNN-FL X 

19 Mr. HIGGINS- LA X 

20 Mr. NORMAN- SC X 

21 Mrs. LESKO- AZ X 

22 Mr. CLOUD - TX 

1 Ms. JOHNSON, Rankina- TX X 

2 Ms. LOFGREN - CA X 

3 Mr. LIPINSKI - IL X 

4 Ms. BONAMICI- OR 

5 Mr.BERA-CA X 

6 Ms.ESTY-CT X 

7 Mr. VEASEY- TX X 

8 Mr. BEYER- VA X 

9 Ms. ROSEN- NV X 

10 Mr. LAMB-PA X 

11 Mr. MCNERNEY- CA X 

12 Mr. PERLMUTTER- CO X 

13 Mr. TONKO- NY X 

14 Mr. FOSTER- /L 

15 Mr. TAKANO- CA X 

16 Ms. HANABUSA- HI 

17 Mr. CRIST- FL X 

TOTALS 13 19 

•• Vice Chair 

* The vote was changed by unanimous consent to reflect a vote of No by Mr. Palmer and a vote 

of Aye by Ms. Bonamici. 
835 

The question is now on agreeing to the amendment in the nature 

of a substitute offered by the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. 

Perlmutter. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Those opposed, no. 

The ayes have it and the amendment is agreed to. 

A reporting quorum being present, I move that the Committee on 

Science, Space, and Technology report S. 141 to the House, as 

amended, with the recommendation that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting S. 141 to the House, as 

amended. 

All in favor, say aye. 

Those opposed, no. 

The ayes have it, and S. 141, as amended, is ordered reportedly 

favorably to the House. 

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

S. 141, as amended, is ordered reported to the House with a favorable recommendation. I ask unanimous consent that the staff be 

authorized to make any necessary technical and conforming 

changes. Without objection, so ordered. 

H.R. 6468 

Chairman SMITH. Pursuant to notice, I now call up H.R. 6468, 

the Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act. And the clerk 

will report the bill. 

The CLERK. H.R. 6468, a bill to direct that certain assessments 

with respect to toxicity of chemicals be carried out by the program 

offices of the Environmental Protection Agency and for other purposes. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the bill will be considered as 

read and open for amendment at any point, and I’ll recognize myself to speak on the legislation. 

Today, we are considering a bill that restores the scientific integrity of chemical toxicity assessments being conducted by the EPA. 

H.R. 6468 ensures that chemical hazard identification and dose response assessments will be transparent, complete, and tailored to 

the regulatory needs of EPA program offices. 

I want to thank Chairman Biggs for his hard work on this legislation and urge my colleagues to support this bill. 

And the bill’s sponsor, the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Biggs, 

is recognized to speak on the legislation. 

Mr. BIGGS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to 

speak on behalf of my bill, the Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act. This legislation ensures that chemical assessments 

conducted by the EPA will advance the Agency’s core mission of 

protecting human health and the environment. 

Specifically, the bill will eliminate EPA’s flawed Integrated Risk 

Information System, or IRIS, and return the responsibility of conducting hazard identification and dose response assessments to the 

EPA’s program offices, which are best situated to perform the 

work. 

Without any foundation in law or direction from Congress, EPA 

administratively created the IRIS program in 1985 to ‘‘foster consistency’’ in chemical assessments conducted by EPA. Unfortu-
836 

nately, IRIS has evolved into a program plagued by inefficiencies 

and a lack of transparency, resulting in questionable science that 

can have a significant impact on the marketplace. 

When IRIS assigns a toxicity value to a chemical, Federal, State, 

and local regulatory authorities use it to make rules and regulations that can impact commerce. While in practice the program 

does not have any regulatory authority, the assessments produced 

by the program can still have a negative impact on the economy 

similar to the effect of regulation. 

Over the past year, the Environment Subcommittee has conducted a hearing, hosted briefings with the EPA, met with stakeholders, and worked with our colleagues to learn more about the 

IRIS program. It has become very apparent that the program has 

lost its way. This bill will address the problems of the program by 

ensuring that any future chemical assessments performed are tailored to the regulatory need of the relevant EPA program office. 

Let me be clear: Chemical toxicity assessments will still be performed by the Agency. They will just be performed by the program 

offices rather than IRIS. These future assessments will be stored 

in a publicly accessible chemical assessment data base, which will 

also retain the existing IRIS assessments. 

Most importantly, this legislation promotes reliability in chemical hazard identification and dose response assessments by ensuring they will be carried out using the best available science and 

based on the weight of the scientific evidence. 

The bill requires that the EPA meet stringent scientific standards when assessing any given chemical by considering the relevance of the data, the uncertainty in the scientific information, 

the extent to which it has been peer-reviewed, and whether the 

findings are reproducible. 

Last, the bill creates a Chemical Hazard Identification and Dose 

Response Steering Committee, chaired by the Office of Research 

and Development, to prevent duplication of work performed by the 

program offices. The Steering Committee will also be authorized to 

consider third-party assessments as a supplement to the work 

being performed by the program offices, provided that the thirdparty assessments meet the scientific standards which are outlined 

in the bill. The Chemical Assessment Improvement Act is a commonsense effort to refocus EPA science back to its core mission. 

I thank Chairman Smith, Vice Chairman Lucas, Environment 

Subcommittee Chairman Norman, Representatives Rohrabacher, 

Posey, Weber, Babin, Higgins, Lesko, Hultgren, Abraham, Webster, 

Marshall, and Dunn for cosponsoring this important legislation. I 

encourage the rest of my colleagues to support this bill. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MR. BIGGS

Thank you, Mr. Chairman for the opportunity to speak on behalf of my bill, H.R. 

6468, the Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act. 

This legislation ensures that chemical assessments conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will be transparent, reliable, and useful for program offices to carry out EPA’s core mission of protecting human health and the 

environment. 

Specifically, the bill will eliminate EPA’s flawed Integrated Risk Information System, or IRIS, and return the responsibility of conducting hazard identification and 

dose response assessments to the agency’s program offices, which are best situated 

to perform the work. 
837 

Without any foundation in law or direction from Congress, EPA administratively 

created the IRIS program in 1985 to ‘‘foster consistency’’ in chemical assessments 

conducted by EPA. Unfortunately, IRIS has evolved into a program plagued by inefficiencies and a lack of transparency, resulting in questionable science that can have 

a significant impact on the marketplace. 

When IRIS assigns a toxicity value to a chemical, federal, state, and local regulatory authorities use it to make rules and regulations that can impact commerce. 

While in practice the program does not have any regulatory authority, the assessments produced by the program can still have a negative impact on the economy 

similar to the effect of regulation. 

Over the past year, the Environment Subcommittee has conducted a hearing, 

hosted briefings with the EPA, met with stakeholders, and worked with our colleagues to learn more about the IRIS program. It has become very apparent that 

the program has lost its way. 

H.R. 6468 will address the problems of the program by ensuring that any future 

chemical assessments performed are tailored to the regulatory need of the relevant 

EPA program office. Let me be clear: Chemical toxicity assessments will still be performed by the agency. They will just be performed by the program offices rather 

than IRIS. These future assessments will be stored in a publicly accessible Chemical 

Assessment Database, which will also retain the existing IRIS assessments. 

Most importantly, this legislation promotes reliability in chemical hazard identification and dose response assessments by ensuring they will be carried out using 

the best available science and based on the weight of the scientific evidence. H.R. 

6468 requires that the EPA meet stringent scientific standards when assessing any 

given chemical by considering the relevance of the data, the uncertainty in the scientific information, the extent to which it has been peer reviewed, and whether the 

findings are reproducible. 

Lastly, the bill creates a chemical hazard identification and dose response steering 

committee, chaired by the Office of Research and Development, to prevent duplication of work performed by the program offices. The steering committee will also be 

authorized to consider third-party assessments as a supplement to the work being 

performed by the program offices provided that the third-party assessments meet 

the scientific standards outlined in the bill. 

H.R. 6468 is common-sense legislation that will re-focus EPA science back to its 

core mission. I want to thank Chairman Smith, Vice Chairman Lucas, Environment 

Subcommittee Vice Chairman Norman, and Representatives Rohrabacher, Posey, 

Weber, Babin, Higgins, Lesko, Hultgren, Abraham, Webster, Marshall, and Dunn 

for cosponsoring this important legislation. I encourage the rest of my colleagues to 

support this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. BIGGS. Mr. Chairman, I also ask unanimous consent to enter 

into the record a letter from former Democratic Congressman Cal 

Dooley, the CEO of the American Chemistry Council, which represents more than 170 companies that do business in the field of 

chemistry, which supports the Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act. This letter acknowledges that IRIS has had a, quote, 

‘‘routine lack of transparency in the program, as well as failures in 

efficiency and direction that have mired the credibility of the program,’’ close quote. 

Furthermore, his letter asserts that the, quote, ‘‘legislation will 

ensure that EPA’s program offices conduct chemical assessments in 

a timely manner consistent with the best available science,’’ close 

quote. 

So, Mr. Chairman, I ask that the—that that letter be incorporated into the record. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Without objection, so ordered. 

Mr. BIGGS. And I encourage my colleagues to vote for this bill, 

and I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Thank you, Mr. Biggs. 

The gentleman from New York, Mr. Tonko, is recognized. 

Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chair, I move to strike the last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 
838 

Mr. TONKO. Thank you. I strongly oppose the bill, which would 

decimate the IRIS program. The IRIS program provides human 

health assessments of chemicals found in our environment. The 

IRIS program has reviewed hundreds of chemicals and supports 

programs across the entire agency. This is an important program 

that keeps us safe. We should not be gutting it; we should be ensuring that it has the resources and staff to thrive and continue to 

provide toxicity information. It does not make sense to tear apart 

this program and ignore research expertise. 

By fragmenting the office, we would be creating a system where 

critical assessments would occur in other offices that lack the capacity and expertise to properly conduct these assessments. Instead, we would be giving an even louder voice to industry interests who would replace unbiased expertise. This would hurt public 

health and is a dangerous endeavor. 

On EPA’s own website it States the IRIS program is located 

within EPA’s National Center for Environmental Assessment in 

the Office of Research and Development. The placement of the IRIS 

program in ORD is intentional. It ensures that IRIS can’t develop 

impartial toxicity information independent of its use by EPA’s programs and regional offices to set national standards and cleanup 

hazardous sites. 

I’m also concerned by the secret science language in the bill. This 

type of language is thinly veiled campaign to limit serious and 

highly credible scientific research that supports critical regulatory 

action. 

We also have seen a disturbing trend at EPA lately where 

science is being sidelined. I am extremely concerned by reports that 

the release of a study which detailed cancer risks from formaldehyde is being delayed, with the results kept hidden from the public. 

EPA’s priority must be to protect public health and the environment. Weakening the IRIS program will likely delay other critical 

toxicity assessments, and some may never see the light of day. 

In addition to my objections to the substance, I also have serious 

process concerns with this bill. Not only am I on this Committee, 

I also serve as the Ranking Member of the Energy and Commerce 

Subcommittee on the Environment. This bill meddles with existing 

regulatory and program requirements contained in the many public 

health statutes that EPA implements. These statutes are under the 

jurisdiction of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. 

I understand that the majority has not had substantive discussions with the staff of Energy and Commerce Committee about this 

bill to avoid unintentional, overlapping, or adverse consequences in 

law and regulation. 

Moreover, I am concerned by the process behind the first bill, 

H.R. 6399, the Chemical Assessments Improvement Act. That bill 

was introduced last Tuesday and noticed for a markup last 

Wednesday, but the House Parliamentarian determined that the 

bill was entirely within the jurisdiction of the Energy and Commerce Committee. The morning of the markup, the bill was abruptly pulled. 

Before this bill is considered, the following questions should be 

answered: One, has Committee spoken with EPA, and have formal 
839 

comments from the Agency on this bill been received? If so, will the 

majority please share them? 

Two, what other groups have been talked to about this bill? Can 

we see all the comments received from them on this bill. 

Three, what is the cost estimate of this bill? 

Four, what are the potential impacts of this bill on the programs 

and laws of EPA? 

I do not believe we should be marking up this legislation at all. 

I will oppose this legislation and encourage my colleagues to do the 

same. 

And with that, Mr. Chair, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Tonko. 

Are there other Members who wish to be heard? 

Down here, the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Babin, is recognized. 

Mr. BABIN. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. 

Thank you for bringing forward this critical piece of legislation. 

I applaud the efforts of the Environmental Subcommittee Chairman Mr. Biggs of Arizona in introducing the Improving Science in 

Chemical Assessments Act to bring much-needed improvements to 

the way that EPA conducts dose response chemical assessments. 

The mission of the EPA is protect human health and the environment, and this legislation will further empower the Agency to ensure that the assessments that it undertakes will do just that. The 

Committee has heard for too long about the issues facing the Integrated Risk Information System, or IRIS, program. In fact, the 

Committee held a hearing in which many concerns regarding scientific integrity and a lack of transparency in the IRIS process 

were raised. Similar concerns have also been raised by the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Government Accountability Office. 

Given the shortcomings of the current program, it is necessary 

to make improvements to the way that chemicals are chosen and 

assessed. This legislation will improve coordination amongst the 

national program offices and regional offices by establishing a 

much-needed Steering Committee. This Committee will allow for 

chemicals to be appropriately selected for assessment, avoiding duplication, and ensuring that they meet a regulatory need. 

Moreover, this legislation will ensure that EPA is using the best 

available science and rely on a weight-of-the-scientific evidence approach when performing these assessments. Together with the 

commonsense scientific standards further outlined in the bill, these 

principles will ensure greater certainty to the marketplace and to 

the American people. 

As a cosponsor of H.R. 6468, the Improving Science in Chemical 

Assessments Act, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. 

I want to thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Babin. 

And the gentlewoman from Oregon, Ms. Bonamici, is recognized. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I move to 

strike the last word. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentlewoman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I oppose the Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act because it would effectively eliminate the Integrated Risk Informa-
840 

tion System within the EPA’s Office of Research and Development. 

The bill proposes a fragmented and weak system of conducting 

chemical assessments that would undermine the Agency’s mission 

to protect human health. 

The EPA created the IRIS back in 1985 to independently assess 

the toxicity of chemicals and to provide a consistent data base of 

human health assessments of chemicals that are found in our environment. It was specifically placed within ORD, so those tasked 

with protecting the public’s health are able to make the best independent decisions they can by using the best available science to 

determine the potential harmful effects of chemical exposures. 

The chemical assessment process requires advanced technical 

knowledge and expertise. Unfortunately, this bill would disperse 

the process across program offices within the EPA that do not have 

the scientific capacity to conduct the rigorous review required to 

provide a thorough chemical analysis. The bill would also allow for 

individual program offices to assign a range of toxicity values instead of a single toxicity value for chemical substances. This could 

allow regulated entities to essentially choose from a number of toxicity values that could lead to very disparate risk assessment decisions nationwide, and the consequences could be dangerous. 

I’m also disappointed that, once again, this Committee chooses to 

ignore processes associated with an agency program. Both the National Academies and EPA’s own Scientific Advisory Board, which 

is comprised of members selected by former Administrator Pruitt, 

have recently commended the IRIS program for its work conducting 

vital chemical assessments. In fact, the National Academies concluded that the EPA has been responsive to its previous recommendations regarding the IRIS program and has made substantial progress in their implementation. 

Also, this bill was not written in a bipartisan fashion and is a 

shortsighted attempt by our majority to restrict science and allow 

for industry influence. It is imperative that these chemical assessments be conducted and the IRIS program should be placed in an 

impartial office like the ORD that has the scientific expertise required to provide critical toxicity information. Disassembling a program that relies on a science-based review process to conduct 

human health assessments and replacing it with a weakened substitute to placate industry is a disservice to the American public. 

I oppose this dangerous bill. I align myself with Mr. Tonko’s concerns about the Committee jurisdiction as well, and I urge my colleagues to vote no. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Bonamici. 

And the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Dunn, is recognized for his 

comments. 

Mr. DUNN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for bringing 

this important legislation markup, and thank you for your leadership on this, Chairman Biggs, introducing the Improving Science in 

Chemical Assessments Act. This bill addresses many concerns raised by the National Academy of Sciences and the Government Accountability Office regarding the integrated risk program system that is the IRIS program 

at EPA. Both the National Academy of Sciences and the GAO have 
841 

been highly critical of the IRIS program and the process it uses to 

review chemicals. This bill improves the EPA’s process for conducting these assessments. 

In order to make these important changes, the Improving Science 

in Chemical Assessments Act will shift the responsibility of performing dose response chemical assessments to the national program offices at the EPA. These offices require such assessments to 

fulfill statutory requirements. 

Moreover, the bill will codify the scientific principles that 

strengthen the quality of chemical assessments. Many of the scientific standards put forward in this legislation come directly from 

the EPA’s own guidelines for undertaking assessments. These are 

commonsense standards that position the EPA to better protect 

human health and the environment. 

As a cosponsor of H.R. 6468, the Improving Science in Chemical 

Assessments Act, I urge my colleagues to support this important 

bill. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Dunn. 

And the gentleman from California, Mr. McNerney, is recognized. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Well, I thank the Chairman for yielding—or I 

move to strike the last word first. 

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. I want to thank the Chairman for giving me a 

few minutes here. 

I’m going to oppose this purely partisan bill, H.R. 6468. Mr. 

Chairman, good legislation needs bipartisan input. We don’t see 

that here. Second, I question the Committee’s jurisdiction, again repeating what Mr. Tonko said. E&C, Energy and Commerce should 

be responsible to markup this bill. And third, of the many problems 

with this bill, I will focus on the politicization and introduction of 

conflict-of-interest influences in the chemical assessment process, 

as well as the overall degradation in the quality of chemical assessments if this bill were to become law. 

H.R. 6468 sets up a Steering Committee that would be chaired 

by a political appointee and have the remainder of its membership 

appointed by the EPA Administrator, creating a highly politicized 

body that would be responsible for determining which assessments 

are carried out and by which program office. Additionally, the 

Steering Committee would have the ability to include third-party 

assessments and to choose the author of these assessments, essentially rolling out the welcome mat for further politicization of what 

should be inherently science-based process. 

Moving chemical assessments conducted by the IRS—IRIS program out of the Office of Research and Development and into individual program offices at the EPA would offer gaps in scientific review process. Program offices use the toxicity information generated by the IRIS program to set national standards and cleanup 

hazardous sites. If only one program office is responsible for conducting an assessment on a given chemical, there’s a danger that 

different routes of exposure could be ignored. 

For example, under this bill, if more than one program office intends to conduct an assessment on a chemical, the previously described Steering Committee would choose which program office 
842 

would lead the chemical assessment. If this bill were to become law 

and a chemical assessment is needed to be conducted on lead, 

which program office would conduct it? If the Office of Air and Radiation took the lead, would it ignore the hazards of lead in water? 

Or if the Office of Water took charge, would it ignore the hazards 

of lead in the air? 

Chemicals found in our environment don’t always follow only one 

route of exposure and can be found across various media such as 

air, water, and soil. Relegating a chemical assessment to one program office would introduce bias in the way the assessments are 

conducted and lead to lower-quality assessments. 

This bill would ultimately endanger human health. Dividing up 

chemical assessments among program offices is a recipe for problems as different routes of exposure to chemical hazards could be 

ignored or under-valuated and would allow for a bias to creep into 

these critical assessments. This is not acceptable for an agency 

charged with protecting human health. The IRIS program provides 

vital toxicity information that is relied upon by States, tribes, regions, and other Federal agencies, and they should continue to be 

housed in an impartial office of research and development that has 

the appropriate scientific expertise and capacity. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back, and I urge my colleagues to vote no 

on this bill. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. McNerney. 

And the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Norman, is recognized. 

Mr. NORMAN. Thank you, Chairman Smith, for bringing this important legislation to a markup. And I also want to thank Environmental Subcommittee Chairman Andy Biggs for his leadership in 

sponsoring this Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act, a 

bill that would increase transparency and efficiency in EPA’s chemical toxicity assessment program. 

H.R. 6468 is designed to refocus EPA science on its core mission 

of protecting humans and the—protecting human health and the 

environment. One of the priorities of President Trump’s EPA has 

been to ensure that agency science is useful and relevant. This bill 

will make chemical toxicity data relevant for the regulatory needs 

of the EPA program offices and useful for States and localities, 

which will continue to have access to the data through the publicly 

available chemical assessments data base. 

For years, the Internal—Integrated Risk Information System, or 

IRIS, program has been unresponsive to national programs office 

needs. The assessments take years, sometimes a decade to complete. Thus, by the time the assessments are complete, they’re useless for the program offices, which must regulate within the statutory time limits. 

This legislation guarantees that chemical assessments will be 

conducted efficiency—efficiently and will be valuable to national 

program offices to carry out their core functions. H.R. 6468 also 

creates a Steering Committee to coordinate functions and to prevent duplications of work among the program offices. EPA regional 

offices will sit on the Steering Committee and will thus continue 

to have a role in determining which assessments are needed for 

regulatory purposes. 
843 

Furthermore, this Steering Committee will be allowed to consider 

third-party assessments performed by academia, outside scientific 

bodies, foreign agencies, and industry, provided that these thirdparty assessments meet the stringent scientific standards in the 

legislation. This will increase the efficiency of the chemical assessment process by allowing program offices to use these third-party 

assessments as supplements and build off the work already done 

by others. 

As a cosponsor of H.R. 6468, the Improving Science in Chemical 

Assessments Act, I urge my colleagues to support this bill. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Norman. 

If there are no other amendments, a reporting quorum being 

present, I move that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology report H.R. 6468 to the House with the recommendation 

that the bill be approved. 

The question is on favorably reporting H.R. 6468 to the House. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Recorded. 

Chairman SMITH. A recorded vote has been requested, and the 

clerk will call the roll. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith? 

Chairman SMITH. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith votes no. 

Chairman SMITH. I mean, thank you for looking up again. I was 

looking at Eddie Bernice Johnson. That’s why I said no. I vote yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Smith votes yes. 

Mr. Lucas? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Rohrabacher? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I vote no but I’m going to change it to yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Rohrabacher votes yes. 

Mr. Brooks? 

Mr. BROOKS. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Brooks votes yes. 

Mr. Hultgren? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Posey? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Massie? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Weber? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Knight? 

Mr. KNIGHT. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Knight votes yes. 

Mr. Babin? 

Mr. BABIN. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Babin votes yes. 

Mrs. Comstock? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Loudermilk? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Abraham? 

Mr. ABRAHAM. Yes. 
844 

The CLERK. Mr. Abraham votes yes. 

Mr. Palmer? 

Mr. PALMER. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Palmer votes yes. 

Mr. Webster? 

Mr. WEBSTER. Yea. 

The CLERK. Mr. Webster votes yes. 

Mr. Biggs? 

Mr. BIGGS. Aye. 

The CLERK. Mr. Biggs votes yes. 

Mr. Marshall? 

Mr. MARSHALL. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Marshall votes yes. 

Mr. Dunn? 

Mr. DUNN. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Dunn votes yes. 

Mr. Higgins? 

Mr. HIGGINS. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Higgins votes yes. 

Mr. Norman? 

Mr. NORMAN. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Norman votes yes. 

Mrs. Lesko? 

Mrs. LESKO. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Lesko votes yes. 

Mr. Cloud? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson? 

Ms. JOHNSON. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Johnson votes no. 

Ms. Lofgren? 

Ms. LOFGREN. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Lofgren votes no. 

Mr. Lipinski? 

Mr. LIPINSKI. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lipinski votes no. 

Ms. Bonamici? 

Ms. BONAMICI. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Bonamici votes no. 

Mr. Bera? 

Mr. BERA. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Bera votes no. 

Ms. Esty? 

Ms. ESTY. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Esty votes no. 

Mr. Veasey? 

Mr. VEASEY. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Veasey votes no. 

Mr. Beyer? 

Mr. BEYER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Beyer votes no. 

Ms. Rosen? 

Ms. ROSEN. No. 

The CLERK. Ms. Rosen votes no. 
845 

Mr. Lamb? 

Mr. LAMB. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Lamb votes no. 

Mr. McNerney? 

Mr. MCNERNEY. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. McNerney votes no. 

Mr. Perlmutter? 

Mr. PERLMUTTER. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Perlmutter votes no. 

Mr. Tonko? 

Mr. TONKO. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Tonko votes no. 

Mr. Foster? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Takano? 

Mr. TAKANO. No. 

The CLERK. Mr. Takano votes no. 

Ms. Hanabusa? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Crist? 

[No response.] 

The CLERK. Mr. Cloud? 

Mr. CLOUD. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Cloud votes yes. 

Mrs. Comstock? 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mrs. Comstock votes yes. 

Mr. Massie? 

Mr. MASSIE. Yes. 

The CLERK. Mr. Massie votes yes. 

Chairman SMITH. The clerk will report the vote. 

The CLERK. Mr. Chairman, 17 Members voted ayes, 13 Members 

voted no. 

OK. The ayes have it, and the bill is agreed to. 
846 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY -1151

h 

Full Committee Roll Call 

Working Quorum: 13 Reporting Quorum: 20 

DATE: July 24,2018 

Bill: H.R. 6468 

ROLL CALL NO. 2 

MEMBER 

1 Mr. SMITH Chair- TX 

2 Mr. LUCAS - OK ** 

3 Mr. ROHRABACHER- CA 

4 Mr. BROOKS - AL 

5 Mr. HULTGREN - IL 

6 Mr. POSEY- FL 

7 Mr. MASSIE - KY 

8 Mr. WEBER- TX 

9 Mr. KNIGHT - CA 

10 Mr. BABIN - TX 

11 Mrs. COMSTOCK- VA 

12 Mr. LOUDERMILK- GA 

13 Mr. ABRAHAM - LA 

14 Mr. PALMER- AL 

15 Mr. WEBSTER- FL 

16 Mr. BIGGS-AZ 

17 Mr. MARSHALL- KS 

18 Mr. DUNN-FL 

19 Mr. HIGGINS - LA 

20 Mr. NORMAN- SC 

21 Mrs. LESKO - AZ 

22 Mr. CLOUD - TX 

1 Ms. JOHNSON, Rankina- TX 

2 Ms. LOFGREN - CA 

3 Mr. LIPINSKI -IL 

4 Ms. BONAMICI- OR 

5 Mr.BERA-CA 

6 Ms.ESTY-CT 

7 Mr. VEASEY - TX 

8 Mr. BEYER- VA 

9 Ms. ROSEN - NV 

10 Mr.LAMB-PA 

11 Mr. MCNERNEY- CA 

12 Mr. PERLMUTTER- CO 

13 Mr. TONKO- NY 

14 Mr. FOSTER -/L 

15 Mr. TAKANO- CA 

16 Ms. HANABUSA- HI 

17 Mr. CRIST- FL 

TOTALS 

•• Vice Chair 

FINAL PASSAGE 

PASSED 

AYE NO PRESENT 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

17 13 

NOT VOTING 
847 

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

H.R. 6468 is ordered reported to the House. I ask unanimous consent that staff be authorized to make any necessary technical and 

conforming changes. Without objection, so ordered. 

If there’s no further discussion, that completes our business. This 

concludes the Science Committee markup. Without objection, the 

gentleman, Mr. Palmer, is recognized. 

Mr. PALMER. Mr. Chairman, I was unavoidably delayed by two 

hearings held simultaneously. I would like to be recorded on the— 

without objection, I would ask unanimous consent to be recorded 

as a no on the previous vote. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Without objection, no on—yes on this vote 

obviously but no on which vote, the—— 

Mr. PALMER. On the amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. On the amendment. Is that clear enough? We 

had three votes. 

Ms. JOHNSON. You got enough to pass. 

Chairman SMITH. We know what you meant. OK. Let me ask the 

clerk, can we go through those amendments and make sure that 

Mr. Palmer knows which amendments he’s voting on? Is that possible? Let’s get—can you all help him out? We need—— 

Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chairman, I was detained and was late for 

the vote on Ms. Johnson’s amendment and—— 

Chairman SMITH. OK. 

Ms. BONAMICI [continuing]. Request unanimous consent to be recorded as an aye on the amendment vote. 

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, the gentlewoman will be recorded as an aye on the Johnson amendment. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. And we’re still going to get clarification from 

Mr. Palmer here. OK. OK. We’ll put Mr. Palmer’s comments in the 

record, but for purposes today, he was recorded as voting yes on 

final passage right now—— 

Mr. PALMER. Yes. 

Chairman SMITH [continuing]. Is that correct? OK. Do we need 

to announce a recount on those previous votes, considering the 

Bonamici vote yes for the Johnson amendment and the Palmer vote 

yes on final? 

The CLERK. Sir, the final passage of S. 141 was by voice vote. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. 

The CLERK. If Mr. Palmer would care to register his vote on Ms. 

Johnson’s amendment to S. 141? 

Chairman SMITH. OK. And, Mr. Palmer, is that a no on the Johnson amendment? 

Mr. PALMER. It’s a no on the Johnson amendment. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Without objection. 

The CLERK. Sir, the final vote on Ms. Johnson’s amendment to 

S. 141 is 20 Members—excuse me, 14 Members voting yes, 20 

Members voting no. 

Chairman SMITH. OK. Great. If there’s no further discussion, this 

completes our business and this concludes the Science Committee 

markup. Without objection, the Committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:57 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(849) 

Appendix: 

S. 141, AMENDMENT ROSTER, H.R. 6468 
850 

AUTHENT!CA.TE9 US COVU<NME~T 

IN~O~,'v\AT!ON 

GPO 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S.l41 

IN THE HOUSE Ol<' REPRESENTATIVES 

l\!Lw 3, 2017 

IC 

Referred to the Conm1ittee on Science, Space, and Technology, and in addition 

to the Committees on Armed Sen·ices, Transportation and Infrastructure, 

Foreign Affairs, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, for 

a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of sueh provisions as fall "ithin the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

AN ACT 

To improve understanding and forecasting of space weather 

events, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and Ilouse of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
851 

2 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the "Space Weather Re3 search and Forecasting Act". 

4 SEC. 2. SPACE WEATHER. 

5 (a) IN GENERAh-Subtitle VI of title 51, United 

6 States Code, is amended by adding after chapter 605 the 

7 following: 

8 "CHAPTER 607-SPACE WEATHER 

"60701. Space weather. 

"60702. ObsmTations and forecasting. 

"60703. Research and technology. 

"60704. Space weather data. 

9 "§ 60701. Space weather 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

ings: 

"(a) FINDINGS.-Congress makes the following find-

" ( 1) Space weather events pose a significant 

threat to humans working in the space environment 

and to modern technological systems. 

"(2) The effects of severe space weather events 

on the eleetrie power grid, satellites and satellite 

communications and information, airline operations, 

astronauts living and working in space, and spacebased position, navigation, and timing systems could 

have significant societal, economic, national security, 

and health impacts. 

S 141 RFH 
852 

8 

"(3) Eart,h and space observations provide cru2 cia! data necessary to predict and warn about space 

3 weather events. 

4 "( 4) Clear roles and accountability of Federal 

5 departments and agencies are critical for an efficient 

6 and effective response to threats posed by space 

7 weather. 

8 "(5) In October 2015, the National Science and 

9 Technology Council published a National Space 

10 Weather Strategy and a National Space Weather 

11 Action Plan seeking to integrate national space 

12 weather efforts and add new capabilities to meet in13 creasing demand for space weather information. 

14 "(b) FEDERAL AGENCY ROLES.-

15 "(1) FINDINGS.-Congress finds that16 "(A) the National Oceanic and Atmos17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

pheric Administration provides operational 

space weather forecasting and monitoring for 

civil applications, maintains ground and spacebased assets to provide observations needed for 

forecasting, prediction, and warnings, and develops requirements for space weather forecasting technologies am! science; 

"(B) the Department of Defense provides 

operational space weather forecasting, moniS 141 RFH 
853 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

4 

taring, and research for the department's 

unique missions and applications; 

"(C) the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration provides increased understanding of the fundamental physics of the 

Sun-Earth system through space-based observations and modeling, develops new space-based 

technologies and missions, and monitors space 

weather for NASA's space missions; 

"(D) the National Science J<~oundation provides increased understanding of the Sun-Earth 

system through ground-based measurements, 

technologies, and modeling; 

"(E) the Department of the Interior collects, distributes, and archives operational 

gTound-based magnetometer data in the United 

States and its territories, and works with the 

international community to improve global geophysical monitoring and develops crustal conductivity models to assess and mitigate risk 

from space weather induced electric ground currents; and 

"(F) the Federal Aviation Administration 

provides operational requirements for space 

weather services in support of aviation and for 

S 141 RFH 
854 

5 

coordination of these requirements with the 

2 International Civil Aviation Organization, inte3 grates space weather data and products into the 

4 Next Generation Air Transportation System, 

5 and conducts real-time monitoring of the 

6 charged particle radiation environment to pro7 teet the health and safety of crew and pas8 sengers during space weather events. 

9 "(2) 0FI<'ICE OF SCIENCE At'\ID TECHNOLOGY 

10 POLIG'Y.-The Director of the Office of Science and 

11 Technology Policy shall12 "(A) coordinate the development and im13 plementation of Federal Government activities 

14 to improve the Nation's ability to prepare, 

15 avoid, mitigate, respond to, and recover from 

16 potentially devastating impacts of space weath17 er events; and 

18 "(B) coordinate the activities of the space 

19 weather interagency working group established 

20 under subsection (e). 

21 "(c) SPACE WEATHER lNTEIL'\GENCY WORKING 

22 GROUP.-In order to continue coordination of executive 

23 branch efforts to understand, prepare, coordinate, and 

24 plan for space weather, the National Science and TechS 141 RFH 
855 

6 

1 nology Council shall establish an interagency working 

2 group on space weather. 

3 "(d) MElVIBERSHIP.-In order to understand andre4 spond to the adverse effects of space weather, the interS agency working group established under subsection (c) 

6 shall leverage capabilities aeross partieipating Federal 

7 agencies, iucluding8 "(1) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad9 ministration; 

10 "(2) the National Aeronautics and Space Ad11 ministration; 

12 "(3) the National Science Foundation; 

13 "(4) the Department of Defense; 

14 "(5) the Department of the Interior; 

15 "(6) the Department of Homeland Security; 

16 "(7) the Department of Energy; 

17 "(8) the Department of Transportation, includ18 ing the Federal Aviation Administration; and 

19 "(9) the Department of State. 

20 "(c) INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS.-

21 "(1) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-lt is the sense of 

22 Congress that the interagency collaboration between 

23 the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

24 and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdminisS 141 RFH 
856 

7 

1 tration on terrestrial weather observations pro2 vides3 "(A) an effective mechanism for improving 

4 weather and elimate data collection while avoidS ing unnecessary duplication of capabilities 

6 across Federal agencies; and 

7 "(B) an agency collaboration model that 

8 could benefit space weather observations. 

9 "(2) INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS.-'l'he Ad1 0 ministrator of the National Aeronautics and Space 

11 Administration and the Administrator of the Na12 tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shall 

13 enter into one or more interagency agreements pro14 viding for cooperation and collaboration in the devel15 opment of space weather spacecraft, instruments, 

16 and technologies in accordance \vith this chapter. 

17 "§ 60702. Observations and forecasting 

18 "(a) PoLICY.-It is the policy of the United States 

19 to establish and sustain a baseline capability for space 

20 weather observations. 

21 "(b) INTEGRATED ST&\cTEGY.-

22 "(1) IN GENERA!J.-'l'he Director of the Office 

23 of Science and Technology Policy, in coordination 

24 ·with the Administrator of the National Oceanic and 

25 Atmospheric Administration, the Administrator of 

S 141 RFH 
857 

8 

1 the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 

2 the Director of the National Science Foundation, 

3 and the Secretary of Defense, and in consultation 

4 with the academic and commercial communities, 

5 shall develop an integrated strategy for solar and 

6 solar vvind observations beyond the lifetime of cur7 rent assets, that considers8 "(A) the provision of solar wind measure9 ments and other measurements essential to 

10 space weather forecasting; and 

11 "(B) the provision of solar and space 

12 weather measurements important for scientific 

13 purposes. 

14 "(2) CONSIDERATIONS.-In developing the 

15 strategy under paragraph (1), the Director of the 

16 Office of Science and Technology Policy shall con17 sider small satellite options, hosted payloads, com18 mercia! options, international options, and prize au19 tlwrity. 

20 "(c) CRITICAL 0BSERVATIONS.-In order to sustain 

21 current space-based observational capabilities, the Admin22 istrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Adminis23 tration shall24 "(1) in cooperation with the European Space 

25 Agency, maintain operations of the Solar and 

S 141 RFH 
858 

9 

Heliospherie Observatory/Large Angle and Spee2 trometric Coronagraph (referred to in this section as 

3 'SOHO!LASCO') for as long as the satellite con4 tinues to deliver quality observations; and 

5 "(2) prioritize the reception of LASCO data. 

6 "(d) ADDITIONAL CAPABILITY FOR SoLAR brAG7 ING.-

8 "(1) IN GENERAL.-The Administrator of the 

9 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

10 shall secure reliable secondary capability for near 

11 real-time coronal mass ejection imagery. 

12 "(2) OPTIONS.-The Administrator of the Na13 tiona! Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in 

14 coordination with the Secretary of Defense and the 

15 Administrator of the National Aeronautics and 

16 Space Administration, shall develop options to build 

17 and deploy one or more instmments for near real18 time coronal mass ejeetion imagery. 

19 "(3) CONSIDEH.ATIONS.-ln developing options 

20 under paragraph (2), the Administrator of the Na21 tiona! Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shall 

22 consider commercial solutions, prize authority, aca23 demic and international partnerships, microsatellites, 

24 ground-based instruments, and opportunities to deS 141 RFH 
859 

10 

ploy the instrument or instruments as a secondary 

2 payload on an upcoming planned launch. 

3 "( 4) COSTS.-ln implementing paragraph (1), 

4 the Administrator of the National Oceanic and At5 mospheric Administration shall prioritize a cost-ef6 fective solution. 

7 "(5) 0PERA'fiONAij PLANNING.-The Adminis8 trator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad9 ministration shall develop an operational contingency 

10 plan to provide continuous space weather forecasting 

11 in the event of a SOHO/LASCO failure. 

12 "(6) BRIEFING.-Not later than 120 days after 

13 the date of enactment of the Space Weather Re14 search and Forecasting Act, the Administrator of 

15 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra16 tion shall provide a briefing to the Committee on 

17 Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Sen18 ate and the Committee on Science, Space, and Tech19 nology of the House of Representatives on the op20 tions for building and deploying the instrument or 

21 instruments described in paragraph (2) and the 

22 operational contingency plan developed under para23 graph (5). 

24 "(e) FOLLOW-ON SPACE-BASED OBSERVATIONS.-

25 The Administrator of the National Oceanic and AtmosS 141 RFH 
860 

11 

pheric Administration, in coordination with the Secretary 

2 of Defense, shall develop requirements and a plan for fol3 low-on space-based observations for operational purposes, 

4 in accordance with the integrated strategy developed 

5 under subsection (b). 

6 "(f) REPORT.-Not later than 180 days after the 

7 date of enaetmeut of the Space Weather Research and 

8 J1,orecasting Act, the Director of the Office of Science and 

9 Technology Policy shall submit to the Committee on Com10 merce, Science, and 'l'ransportation of the Senate and the 

11 Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the 

12 Honse of Representatives a report on the integrated strat13 egy under subsection (b), including the plans for follow14 on space-based observations under subsection (e). 

15 "(g) GIWUND-B&"lED 0BSERVATIONS.-The Ka16 tiona! Science J1'oundation, the Air Force, and where prac17 ticable in support of the Air Force, the Navy shall each18 "(1) maintain and improve, as necessary and 

19 advisable, ground-based observations of the Sun in 

20 order to help meet the priorities identified in section 

21 60703(a); and 

22 "(2) provide space weather data by means of its 

23 set of ground-based facilities, including radars, 

24 lidars, magnetometers, radio receivers, aurora and 

S 141 RFH 
861 

12 

1 airglow imagers, spectrometers, interferometers, and 

2 solar observatories. 

3 "(h) GROUND-BASED OBSERVATIONS DATA.-The 

4 National Science I<~oundation shall5 "(1) provide key data streams from the plat6 forms described in subsection (g) for researeh and to 

7 support space weather model development; 

8 "(2) develop experimental models for scientific 

9 purposes; and 

10 "(8) support the transition of the experimental 

11 models to operations where appropriate. 

12 "§ 60703. Research and technology 

13 "(a) USER NEEDS.-

14 "(1) IN GENERAL.-The Administrator of the 

15 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 

16 the Secretary of the Air li'orce, and where prac17 tieable in support of the Air Foree, the Secretary of 

18 the Navy, in eoujunetion with the heads of other rel19 evant Federal ageneies, shall conduct a comprehen20 sive survey to identify and prioritize the needs of 

21 spaee weather forecast users, ineluding spaee weath22 er data and space weather forecast data needed to 

23 improve services and inform research priorities and 

24 teehuology needs. 

S 141 RFH 
862 

13 

"(2) CONTENTS.-ln conducting the com2 prehensive survey under paragraph (1), the Adminis3 trator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad4 ministration, the Secretary of the Air Force, and 

5 where practicable in support of the Air Force, the 

6 Secretary of the Navy, at a minimum, shall7 "(A) consider the goals for forecast lead 

8 time, accuracy, coverage, timeliness, data rate, 

9 and data quality for space weather observa10 tions; 

11 "(B) identify opportunities to address the 

12 needs identified under paragraph (1) through 

13 collaborations with academia, the private sector, 

14 and the international community; 

15 "(C) identity opportunities for new tech16 nologies and instmmentation to address the 

17 needs identified under paragTaph (1); and 

18 "(D) publish a report on the findings 

19 under subparagraphs (A) through (C). 

20 "(3) PUBUCATION.-Not later than 1 year 

21 after the date of enactment of the Space Weather 

22 Research and Forecasting Act, the Administrator of 

23 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra24 tion, the Secretary of the Air Foree, and where praeS 141 RFH 
863 

14 

ticable in support of the Air Force, the Secretary of 

2 the Navy, shall3 "(A) make the results of the comprehen4 sive survey publicly available; and 

5 "(B) notifY the Committee on Commerce, 

6 Scienee, and Transportation of the Senate and 

7 the Committee on Seience, Space, and Tech8 nology of the House of Representatives of the 

9 publication under subparagraph (A). 

10 "(b) RESEARCH ACTIVITIES.-

11 "(1) BASIC RESEARCH.-The Director of the 

12 National Science l<'oundation, Administrator of the 

13 National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and 

14 Secretary of Defense shall continue to carry out 

15 basic research activities on heliophysics, geospaee 

16 science, and space weather and support competitive, 

17 merit-based, peer-reviewed proposals for research, 

18 modeling, and monitoring of space weather and its 

19 impacts, including science goals outlined in Solar 

20 and Space Physics Decadal surveys conducted by the 

21 National Academy of Sciences. 

22 "(2) lVIUL'l'IDISCIPI,I:\'ARY RESEARCH.-

23 "(A) FINDINGS.-Congress finds that the 

24 multidisciplinary nature of solar and space 

25 physics creates funding challenges that require 

S 141 RFH 
864 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

15 

coordination across scientific disciplines and 

Federal agencies. 

"(B) MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH.-

'l'he Director of the National Science Foundation, the Administrator of the National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration, and the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration shall pursue multidisciplinary research in subjects that further our 

understanding of solar physics, space physics, 

and space weather. 

"(C) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-lt is the 

sense of Congress that the Administrator of the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

and Director of the National Science Foundation should support competitively awarded 

Heliophysics Science Centers. 

18 "(e) SCIENCE MrssroNs.-The Administrator of the 

19 National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall seek 

20 to implement missions that meet the science objectives 

21 identified in Solar and Space Physics Decadal surveys con22 dueted by the National Academy of Sciences. 

23 "(d) RESEARCH TO OPERATIONS.-

24 "(1) IN GENERAL.-'l'he Administrator of the 

25 National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the 

S 141 RFH 
865 

16 

Director of the National Science .B~oundation, the 

2 Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmos3 pheric Administration, the Secretary of the Air 

4 Force, and where practicable in support of the Air 

5 I<~orce, the Secretary of the Navy, shall6 "(A) develop a formal mechanism to tran7 sition National Aeronautics and Space Adminis8 tration, National Science Foundation, Air 

9 Force, and Navy research findings, models, and 

10 capabilities, as appropriate, to National Oceanic 

11 and Atmospheric Administration and Depart12 ment of Defense space weather operational fore13 casting centers; and 

14 "(B) enhance coordination between re15 search modeling centers and forecasting cen16 ters. 

17 "(2) OPERATIONAL NEEDS.-The Adminis18 trator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad19 ministration and the Secretary of Defense, in coordi20 nation "\\ith the Administrator of the National Aero21 nautics and Space Administration and the Director 

22 of the National Science I<~oundation, shall develop a 

23 fonnal mechanism to communicate the operational 

24 needs of space weather forecasters to the research 

25 community. 

S 141 RFH 
866 

17 

"(e) TECHNOJ,OGY DEVELOPMENT.-

2 "(1) FINDINGS.-Congress finds that observa3 tions and measurements closer to the Sun and ad4 vanced instmmentation would provide for more ad5 vanced warning of space weather disturbances (as 

6 defined in section 3 of the Space Weather Research 

7 and Forecasting Act). 

8 "(2) TECHNOLOGY Ac'"D INSTRUMENTATION DE9 VBLOPMENT.-The Administrator of the National 

10 Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Dill rector of the National Science Foundation shall sup12 port the development of technologies and instmmen13 tation to improve space weather forecasting lead14 time and accuracy to meet the needs identified by 

15 the Administrator of the National Oceanic and At16 mospheric Administration. 

17 "§ 60704. Space weather data 

18 "(a) IK GEl'.'ERAh-The Administrator of the Na19 tional Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Di20 rector of the National Science Foundation shall21 "(1) make space weather related data obtained 

22 for scientific research purposes available to space 

23 weather forecasters and operations centers; and 

24 "(2) support model development and model ap25 plications to space weather forecasting. 

S 141 RFH 
867 

18 

"(b) RESEARCH.-The Administrator of the National 

2 Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shall make space 

3 weather related data obtained from operational forecasting 

4 available for scientific research.". 

5 (b) TECHNICAL Al'\'D CONFORMING AvlENDMENTS.-

6 (1) REPEAL OF SECTION 809.-Section 809 of 

7 the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

8 Authorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 18388) and 

9 the item relating to that section in the table of con10 tents under section l(b) of that Act (124 Stat. 

11 2806) are repealed. 

12 (2) TABLE OF CHAPTERS.-The table of chap13 ters of title 51, United States Code, is amended by 

14 adding after the item relating to chapter 605 the fol15 lowing: 

"607. Space weather ................................................................................ 60701". 

16 SEC. 3. SPACE WEATHER METRICS. 

17 (a) DEFINITIONS.-ln this section: 

18 (1) SPACE WEATHBR DISTURBANCE.-The term 

19 "space weather disturbance" includes geo-electric 

20 fields, ionizing radiation, ionospheric disturbances, 

21 solar radio bursts, and upper atmospheric expansion. 

22 (2) SPACE WEATHER BENCHMARK.-Thc term 

23 "space weather benchmark" means the physical 

24 characteristics and conditions describing the nature, 

S 141 RFH 
868 

19 

1 frequency, and intensity of space weather disturb2 anees. 

3 (b) BENCHMARKS.-

4 (1) PRELIMINARY.-Not later than 90 days 

5 after the date of enactment of this Act, the Space 

6 Weather Interagency Working Group, established 

7 under section 60701 of title 51, United States Code, 

8 in consultation with academic and commercial ex9 perts, shall10 (A) assess existing data, the historical 

11 record, models, and peer-reviewed studies on 

12 space weather; and 

13 (B) develop preliminary benchmarks, based 

14 on current scientific understanding and the his15 torical record, for measuring solar disturbances. 

16 (2) ~-,INAL.-Not later than 18 months after 

17 the date the preliminary henchmarks are developed 

18 under paragraph (1), the Space ~Weather Inter19 agency Working Group shall publish final bench20 marks. 

21 (3) REV1EW.-The Administrator of the Na22 tiona! Aeronautics and Space Administration shall 

23 contract with the National Academy of Sciences to 

24 review the benchmarks established under paragraph 

25 (2). 

S 141 RFH 
869 

20 

( 4) REV1SIONS.-The Space Weather Inter2 agency Working Group shall update and revise the 

3 final benchmarks under paragraph (2), as necessary, 

4 based on5 (A) the results of the re·view under para6 graph (3); 

7 (B) any significant new data or advances 

8 m scientific understanding that become avail9 able; or 

10 (C) the evolving needs of entities impacted 

11 by solar disturbances. 

12 SEC. 4. PROTECTION OF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE. 

13 (a) IN GENERAL-The Administrator of the Na14 tiona! Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in con15 sultation "\\':ith the heads of other relevant Federal agen16 cies, shall provide information about space weather haz17 ards to the Secretary of Homeland Security for purposes 

18 of this section. 

19 (b) CRITICAL lNFRASTRUCTlTRE.-The Secretary of 

20 Homeland Security, in consultation with sector-specific 

21 agencies, the Administrator of the National Oceanic and 

22 Atmospheric Administration, and the heads of other rel23 evant ag·encies, shall24 (1) include, in meeting national critical infra25 structure reporting requirements, an assessment of 

S 141 RFH 
870 

21 

the vulnerability of critical infrastmcture to space 

2 weather events, as described by the space weather 

3 benchmarks under section 3; and 

4 (2) support critical infrastmcture providers in 

5 managing the risks and impacts associated with 

6 spaee weather. 

7 (e) PROHIBITION ON NEW REGFI~TORY AUTHOR8 rrY.-Nothing in subsection (b) may be constmed to grant 

9 the Secretary of Homeland Security any authority to pro1 0 mulgate regulations that was not in effect on the day bell fore the date of enactment of this Act. 

12 (d) DEI<'JNITION OF SECTOR-SPECIFIC AGENCY.-ln 

13 this seetion, the term "sector-specific agency" has the 

14 meaning given the term in Presidential Policy DirectiveIS 21 of Febmary 12, 2013 (Critieal Infrastmcture Security 

16 and Resilience), or any successor. 

17 SEC. 5. PROTECTION OF NATIONAL SECURITY ASSETS. 

18 (a) IN GENERAL.-The National Security Council, in 

19 consultation with the Office of the Director of National 

20 Intelligence, the Secretary of Defense, and the heads of 

21 other relevant Federal agencies, shall22 (1) assess the vulnerability of the national secu23 rity community to space weather events, as described 

24 by the space weather benchmarks umler section 3; 

25 and 

S 141 RFH 
871 

22 

1 (2) develop national security mechanisms to 

2 protection national security assets from space weath3 er threats. 

4 (b) COOPEHATION.-The Secretary of Defense, in 

5 consultation with the heads of other relevant l<"'ederal 

6 agencies, shall provide information about space weather 

7 hazards to the National Security Council, Director of N a8 tional Intelligence, and heads of Defense .A.gencies for pur9 poses of this section. 

10 SEC. 6. ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CIVIL AVIATION. 

11 (a) IN GENERAL.-The Administrator of the Federal 

12 Aviation Administration, in consultation with the heads of 

13 other relevant Federal agencies, shall14 (1) assess the safety implications and vulncr15 ability of the national airspace system by space 

16 weather events, as described by the space weather 

17 benchmarks under section 3; 

18 (2) assess methods to mitigate the safety impli19 cations and effects of space weather on aviation 

20 communication systems, aircraft navigation systems, 

21 satellite and ground-based navigation systems, and 

22 potential health effects of radiation e:l!..1Josure; and 

23 (3) assess options for incorporating space 

24 weather into operational training for pilots, cabin 

S 141 RFH 
872 

23 

crew, dispatchers, mr traffic controllers, meteorolo2 gists, and engineers. 

3 (b) SPACE WEATHER COl\IMUNICATION.-The Ad4 ministrator of the .F'ederal Aviation Administration, in 

5 consultation with the heads of other relevant Federal 

6 agencies, shall develop methods to increase the interaction 

7 between the aviation community and the space weather re8 search and service provider community. 

Passed the Senate May 2, 2017. 

Attest: 

S 141 RFH 

JUI.-IE E. ADAMS, 

Secretary. 
873 

0:\CMTEISC\ 15\SPACE\SP _ WEATHF.R__Al'-'S_Ol.XML 

A.MENDM:Elii:'T IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE 

TO 8.141 

OFFERED BY M&,. fE«lMVT'I'J~ 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 

following: 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 1'his Act may be cited as the "Space Weather Coordi3 nation Act". 

4 SEC. 2. SPACE WEATHER. 

5 (a) IN GBNl~RAr,,-Subtitle VI of title 51, United 

6 States Code, is amended by adding after chapter 605 the 

7 following: 

8 "CHAPTER 606-SPACE WEATHER 

"Sec. 

"60601. Space weather findin!l"; policy. 

"60602. Space weather coot'Clination, 

"60603. Spaoe weather pt•ioriti•·•· plan, and research maclmap. 

"60604. Space weather reports. 

"60605. Pilot program fo1· obtaining commercial sector space wenthe!' data. 

"60606. Defmitions. 

9 "§ 60601. Space weather findings; policy 

10 "(a) FINDINGS.-Congress finds the following: 

11 "(1) Space weather events pose a significant 

12 threat to humans working in the space environment, 

13 to modern technological systems, and critical terres14 trial infrastructure. 

g:\VH LC\0720 1 B\072D18.304.xml 

July 20, 2018 (4:10p.m.) 

(70346914) 
874 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SP _ WEATHER_ANS_Ol ,XML 

2 

1 "(2) The effects of severe space weather events 

2 on the electric power grid, satellites and satellite 

3 communications and information, airline operations, 

4 astronauts living and working in space, and space 

5 based position, navigation, and timing systems could 

6 have si~:,•nificant societal, economic, national security, 

7 and health impacts. 

8 "(3) Earth and space observations provide cru9 cial data necessary to predict and warn about space 

10 weather events. 

11 <~(4) Clear roles and accountability of lt,edoral 

12 departments and agencies are critical for an efficient 

13 · and effective response to threats posed by space 

14 weather. 

15 "(5) Observations and measurements closer to 

16 the sun and advanced instmmentation would provide 

17 for more advanced warning of solar activity resulting 

18 in space weather activity. 

19 " ( 6) Coordination and collaboration between 

20 Federal departments and agencies, international 

21 partners, the academic community, and the commer22 cial secwr is necessary w improve the Nation's abil23 ity to tmderstand, prepare for, avoid, mitigate, and 

24 respond to .severe space weather events. 

g;WHL C\0720181072018.304.ml 

July 20, 2018 (4:10p.m.) 

(70346914) 
875 

G:\CMI'E\SC\15\SPACE\SP _ WEATHER...:ANS_Ol.XML 

3 

1 "(7) The commercial sector should be solicited 

2 to_ support and enable :B'ederal Apace weather aetivi3 ties and encouraged to provide and separately invest 

4 in innovative space weather data and services. 

5 "(b) STATE/ilENT 01<' NATIO"NAL POUCY.-lt iR the 

6 policy of the United States that7 "(I) the United States should establish and 

8 maintain baseline -capabilities for space weather ob9 servation and forecasting to protect civil aviation, 

10 space transpo1tation, national security, hmmm life, 

11 critical infrast.ructme, commercial enterprise, and 

12 economic vitality in the United States; 

13 "(2) the establishment and maintenance of such 

14 baseline capabilities for space weather should, to the 

15 extent practicable, leverage the space weather obser· 

16 vation capabilities, data, and services of the aca17 demic community and commercial sector; 

18 "(3) space weather observation and forecasting 

19 arc not exclusive functions of the Federal Govern20 ment; and 

21 "(4) the ]'ederal Government should, as prac22 ticablc, obtain space weather data and services 

23 through contracts with the commercial sector, when 

24 the data and services are available, cost-effective, 

25 and add value. 

g:\VHLCio7201S\072018.304.xml 

July 20,2018 {4:10 p.rn,) 

(70346914) 
876 

G:\CMI'E\SOI5\SPACE\SP _ WEA THER._ANS_Ol.X ML 

4 

1 "§ 60602. Space weather coordination 

2 "(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.---

3 "(1) NATIONAL SPACE CO'UNCIL.-lt is the 

4 sense of Congress that--· 

5 "(A) members of the National Sp1;1.ce Coun6 cil are key stakeholders of the Federal Govern7 ment with respect to space weather; 

8 "(B) the Users' Advisory Group of the Na9 tional Space Council should effectively and effi10 ciently represent and advocate on behalf of non11 governmental organizations and the academic 

12 community within the Nation's space weather 

13 enterprise; and 

14 11 (0) the National Space C01mcil is the ap15 propriate Federal entity to review, establish, 

16 and coordinate the Nation's space weather pri17 orities. 

18 "{2) OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND 1'l<JCHNOJ,OCY 

19 POT,ICY.-lt is the sense of Congress that the Office 

20 of Science and 'l'echnology Policy21 "(A) efficiently and effectively identifies 

22 opportunities and avenues to advance the lead23 ership of the United States in science and tech24 nology; and 

25 "(B) is well positioned to identify opportu26 nities for advancement in coordination of space 

g:IVHLC\072016\072018.304.xml 

July 20,2018 (4:10p.m.) 

{70346914) 
877 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SP _ WEATHER_ANS_Ol.XML 

5 

1 weather research-to-operations and operations2 to-research. 

3 "(b) COORDINATIXG AUTHORITY.-'l'he National 

4 Space Council shall oversee efforts and activities of the 

5 Federal Govermnent6 "(1) to implement the Nation's space weather 

7 priorities; and 

8 "(2) to prepare for, avoid, mitigate, and re9 spond to space weather events. 

10 "(c) NATIONAL COMMI'l"l'Bg FOR SPACE WEATHER 

11 OBSERVATION AND ]'ORECASTL"\'G.-

12 "(1) JfJSTABLISRl'vmNT:-In order to address tho 

13 Nation's space weather priorities and further coordi14 nate efforts to monitor, prepare for, avoid, mitigate, 

15 and respond to space weather events, the President 

16 shall, in consultation with the Chair of the National 

17 Space CouncilIS "(A) establish a committee with respect to 

19 space weather observation and forecasting t.o be 

20 known as the 'National Committee for Space 

21 Weather Observation and Forecasting' (in thi!l 

22 chapter referred to as the 'National Com23 mittcc'); and 

24 "(B) establish one advisory committee for 

25 the purpose specified in paragraph (3)(B), the 

g:\ VHLC\07201 8\072018,304.xml 

July20, 2018 (4;10 p.m.) 

(70346914) 
878 

G:\CMJ:E\SC\15\SPACE\SP _ WEA THER_ANS_O l.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

composition of which shall be determined by the 

Co-Chairs of ti1e National Committee and shall 

include equal representation from the academic 

community, commercial seetor, and space 

5 weather end users. 

6 "(2) NATIONAI, COMMI'l"l'NE COXPOSl'l'ION.-

7 The National Committee shaHS "(A) be co-chaired by the Administrator of 

9 the National Aeronautics and Space Adminis1 0 tration, the &'Cretary of Defense, and the Sec11 rotary of Commerce, or their designated rep12 resentatives, provided that such designated repl3 resentatives are of the Under Secretary or As14 sistant Secretary level or higher; 

15 "(B) include as permanent voting members 

16 n.ll li'edcral departments or agencies determined 

17 to be key space weather stakeholders or other18 wise necessary for inclusion as sueh permanent 

19 voting members by the President, with the 

20 agreement of the Chair of the National Space 

21 Council; and 

22 "(C) be empowered, with the approval of 

23 the Chair of the National Spaee Council, to 

24 allow a relevant, non-member Federal depart25 ment or agency to participate in meetings of 

g:\VHLC\072018\072018.304.xml 

July 20, 201 B (4:1 o p.m.) 

(70346914) 
879 

G;\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SP_WEATHER....ANS_Ol.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g:\VHLC\072018\072018.304.xml 

July 20, 2018 (4:10p.m.) 

7 

the National Committee as either a non-permanent observer or semi-permanent liaison to the 

National Committee. 

"(3) DUTIES.-

· "(A) NATIONAL COMI'vll'l"l'Tm.-'rhe duties 

of the National Committee are the foJlowing: 

"(i) 'ro effectively and efficiently promote coordination between ]'ederal agencies, the academic community, and the 

commercial sector to advance the Nation's 

space enterprise. 

"(ii) To coordinate the implementation of the national space weather plan developed under section 60603(b) across the 

1-~'ederal Government, in partnership with 

the academic conununity, international 

partners, and the commercial sector. 

"(iii) To collaborate with the Director 

of the Office of Science and 'l'echnology 

Policy to identify opportlmities for the academic community and commercial sectors 

to advance the understanding of space 

weather. 

"(B) .AIJ\'1SORY COI'vLMITTEES.-'fhe duty 

of the advisory conunittee established pursuant 

(703469)4) 
880 

G:\CMTE\'K\15\SPACE\SP _ WEATHER_ANS_O l.XML 

8 

1 to paragraph (l)(B) shall be to advise the Na2 tional Committee with respect to3 "(i) the development and implementa4 tion of the national space weather plan es5 tablishecl under section 60603(b); and 

6 "(ii) the capabilities of the academic 

7 community and the commercial sector to 

8 meet the national space weather priorities 

9 identified under section 60603(a). 

10 "(rl) USER SuRVEY.-

11 "(1) I~ GE~IER.AL.-The Ohair of the National 

12 Space Council, in consultation with the heads of 

13 other relevant Federal agencies, the academic com14 munity, and the commercial sector, shall direct the 

15 Users' Advisory Group of the Council to conduct a 

16 comprehensive survey to identify the space weather 

17 observati<m, research, modeling, forecasting, and 

18 prediction needs of the space weather user cornmu19 nity. 

20 "(2) SlJ'RYEY CONSIDERATIONS.-'fhe survey 

21 conducted under paragTaph (1) shall22 "(A) assess the adequacy of current Fed23 era! Government goals for lead time, accuracy, 

24 coverage, timeliness, data rate, and data quality 

25 for space weather observations and forecasting; 

g:WHLC\07201 B\072018.304.xml 

July 20.2018 (4:10 D.m.l 

(70346914) 
881 

G:\CMJ'E\.''iC\15\SPACE\SP _ WEATHER_ANS _Ol.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

g :\VHLC\07201 8\072018.304 .xml 

July 20,2018 (4:10p.m.) 

9 

"(B) identify options and methods to, in 

consultation witl1 the academic community and 

the commercial sector, improve the goals speeified in subparagraph (A); 

"(C) identify opportunities for the generation of new data to address the needs of the 

space weather user community; 

"(D) identify methods to increase coordination of, vvi.th respect to space weather, research-to-operations and operations-to-research; 

"(E) identify the most efficient and effective formal mechanism or mechanisms for the 

sharing of space weather data, operational forecasting needs, research needs, findings, models, 

and capabilities between the Federal Government, the aeademie community, the commercial 

sector, and the space weather user community; 

"(F) identify opportunities for new technologies, research, and instrumentation to aid 

in research, understanding, monitoring, modeling, prediction, and forecasting of space 

weather; and 

"(G) identify methods and technologies to 

improve preparedness for potential space weather events. 

(70346914) 
882 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SP _ WEATHER_ANS_Ol.XML 

10 

1 "(e) SPECL\L AUTHORITY.-ln order to better under2 stand space weather, the National Space Council may le3 verage expertise from any Federal agency or partner, as 

4 deemed appropriate by the Chair of the National Space 

5 Council, including through the use of6 

7 

8 

"(1) interagency U{,l'J'Cements; 

"(2) memoranda of understanding; and 

" ( 3) shared persmmel. 

9 "§ 60603. Space. weather priorities, plan, and research 

10 roa~ap 

11 ''(a) NATIONAL SPACE WEA'l'HRR PRroRrrms.-'rhe 

12 National Space Council, in consultation with the Users' 

13 Advisory Group of the National Space Council, the aca14 demic commmiity, and the eommereial sector, shall estab-

. 15 lish national priorities for space weather, with respect to16 "(1) the protection of life and property; 

17 "(2) the support of the leadership, economic de18 velopment, and national security of the United 

19 States; and 

20 "(3) the space weather prediction and fore21 casting needs of end-users. 

22 "(b) NA'l'lON.AL SPACE WEATHER PLAN.-The Na23 tional Conunittee shall develop a national space weather 

24 plan to implement the priorities established undf.Jr subg:\VHLC\072018\072018.304.xml 

July 20, 201 a (4:10p.m.) 

(70346914) 
883 

G:\CMTE\SC'\15\sPACE\SP _ WEATHBIV\NS __ Ol.&\fl.. 

11 

1 section (a). Such plan shall, with respect to activities car2 ried out to meet such priorities--

3 "(1) delineate appropriate roles among Federal 

4 agencies; 

5 "(2) consider small satellite options, hosted 

6 payloacl<;, public-private partnerships, and commer7 cial options such as data-buys, and other acquisition 

8 approaches, that maximize Federal investment and 

9 minimize overall costs to the I<1

ederal Government; 

10 "(8) identify specific research and development 

11 activities and performance metrics needed to im12 prove operational space weather forecasting; 

13 " ( 4) describe collaborative opportunities with 

14 stakeholders, including the academic community, 

15 nongovernmental organizations, the commercial sec16 tor, and foreign 6rovernments; 

17 " ( 5) leverage the work conducted through the 

18 National Space Weather Strategy and National 

19 Space Weather Action Plan of the National Science 

20 and 1

1

echnology Council before the elate of the enact21 ment of this section; 

22 " ( 6) include a formal mechanism to share oper23 ational needs of space . weather forecasters to the 

24 academic community and commercial sector; and 

g:IVHlC\072016\072016.304.xml 

July 20,201 B (4:10 p.m.) 

(70346914) 
884 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SP_WEATIIER_ANS_Ol.XML 

12 

1 "(7) appropriately prioritize the critical land2 based, sea-based, air-based, or space-based observa3 tion capabiliUes. 

4 "(c) NATIONAL SPAGJs WNA'rHim HESEARCIT HoAD5 MAP.-'l'he Director of the Office of Science and Tech· 

6 nology Policy shall issue a national space weather research 

7 roadrnap that8 "(1) considers the national space weather prior9 ities established under subsection (a); 

10 "(2) considers the national space weather plan 

11 issued under subsection (b); 

12 <~(3) considers the National .Academy of 

13 Sciences' decadal survey recommendations; 

14 "(4) includes a formal mechanism that provides 

15 for the sharing of the research needs, findings, mod16 els, and capabilities with space weather operational 

17 forecasting centers; and 

18 " ( 5) enhances coordination between research 

19 modeling centers, forecasting centers, and the com20 mercial sector. 

21 "§ 80604. Space weather reports 

22 "(a) SURVEY lL-...,'D PRIORITIES.-Not later than 180 

23 days after the date of enactment of the Space Weather 

24 Coordination Act, the Chair of the National Space Council 

25 shall submit to the Committee on Science, Space, and 

g;\VHLC\072018\072018.304.xml 

July 20, 2018 (4:10p.m.) 

(70346914) 
885 

G:\CM1E\SC\ LS\SPACB\SP _ WEATHBR_ANS_Ol.XML 

13 

1 'L'echnology of the House of Representatives and the Com2 mittee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 

3 Senate, a report on4 " ( 1) the findings of the user survey under sec5 tion 60602(d); and 

6 "(2) the recommended space 'veather priorities 

7 under section 60603(a). 

8 "(b) NATIONAL SPACE Wl<JA'PHER Pr,AN.-Not later 

9 than 270 days after the date of enactment of the Spaee 

10 Weather Coordination Act, the Chair of the National 

11 Spa~ Council shall submit to the Committee on Seienee, 

12 Space, and Teclmology of the House of Representatives 

13 and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 'rranspor14 tation of the Senate, the national space weather plan de15 veloped under section 60603(b). 

16 °(c) NATJO~AL SPACE WEA'l'HER Rl<JSJ~ARCH ROAD· 

17 MAP.-Not later than one year after the date of enactment 

· 18 of the Spaee Weather Coordination Act, the Director of 

19 the Office of Science and Teehnology Policy shall submit 

20 to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of 

21 the House of Representatives and the Committee on Com22 meree, Science, and 'l'ransportation of the Senate, the na23 tional space weather research roadmap issued lmder sec24 tion 60603(c). 

g:\VHLC\07201 B\072018.304.xml 

Julv 20, 2019 (4:10 c.m.l 

(70346914) 
886 

0:\CM'Th'\SC\15\SPACE\SP _ WEATHER_ANS_Ol.XML 

14 

1 "§ 60605. Pilot program for obtaining commercial sec· 

2 tor space weather data 

3 "(a) PILOT PROGRAM.-

4 "(.l) ESTABLISl-L'viENT.-Not later than one 

5 year after the date of the enactment of the Space 

6 Weather Coorclination Act, the Secretary of Com7 merce, acting through the Under Secretary of Com8 merce for Oceans and Atmosphere (in this section 

9 referred to as the 'Secretary'), shall establish a pilot 

10 program under whlch the Secretary will offer to 

11 enter into contracts with one or more entitjes in the 

12 commercial sector for the provision to the Secretary 

13 of space weather data generated by such an entity 

14 that meets the standards and specifications pub15 lished under paragraph (2). 

16 "(2) DATA STA:-<DARDS .A.."D SPECIFICATIO~S.-

17 Not later than one year after the date of the enact18 ment of the Space Weather Coordination Act, the 

19 Secretary shall publish standards and speciilcations 

. 20 for f:,"''OUUd-based, OCean-based, air-based, and space21 based commercial space weather data and metadata. 

22 "(3) CONTRACTS.-

23 "(A) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 18 

24 months after the date of enactment of the 

25 Space Weather Coordination Aet, the Secretary 

26 shall offer to enter, through an open competig:\VHLC\072018\072018.304 .xml 

July 20, 2018 (4:10p.m.) 

(70349914) 
887 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SP_WBATHBR_ANS_Dl.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:\VH LC\072018\072018.304.xml 

July 20, 2018 (4:10p.m.) 

15 

tion, into at least one contract with one or more 

commercial sector entities capable of providing 

space weather data that-

"(i) meets the standards and specifications established by the Secretary for 

providing such data; and 

"(ii) is provided in a manner that allows the Secretary to calibrate and evaluate the data for use in space weather research and forecasting models of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 

"(B) AsSESs:\fHN'I'.-Not later than the 

date that is 3 years after the elate on which the 

Secretary enters into a contract tmcler subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall assess, and submit to the Committee on Science, Space, and 

'fechnology of the House of Representatives 

and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

'fransportation of the Senate a report on, the 

extent to which data provided under such contract meet the standards and specifications established tmder paragraph (1) tmd the extent to 

which the pilot program has demonstrated-

(70348914) 
888 

0:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SP _ WEA THBR_ANS_Ol.XML 

16 

1 "(i) the viability of assimilating the 

2 commercially provided data into National 

3 Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

4 space weather researnh and forecasting 

5 models; 

6 "(ii) whether, and by how much, the 

7 data so provided add value to space weath8 er forecasts of the National Oceanic and 

9 Atmospheric Administration; and 

10 "(iii) the accuracy, quality, timeliness, 

11 validity, reliability, usability, information 

12 technology security, and cost-effectiveness 

13 of obtaining commercial space weather 

14 data from commercial sector providers. 

15 "(4) .Al;THORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.-

16 'l'here are authorized to be appropriated to carry out 

17 this subsection $6,000,000 for each of fiscal years 

18 2019 through 2022, to remain available until ex19 pended. 

20 "(b) DATA AND HOSTED SATELU'l'l<J PAYLOADS.-

21 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary 

22 may enter into agreements for23 "(1) the purchase of space weather data 

24 through contracts with commercial providers; and 

g:WHLC\072016\072016,304.xml 

July 20, 201B (4:10p.m.) 

(70346914) 
889 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SP _ WEATHER_ANS_Ol.XML 

17 

1 "(2) the placement of space weather satellite in2 stn1ments on payloads co-hosted by the Federal 

3 Govermnent and the commercial sector. 

4 "(c) OB'rAINING I•'TJTURE DATA.-~If an assessment 

5 under subsection (a)(3)(B) demonstrates the ability of 

6 commercial spaee weather data to meet data and metadata 

7 standards and specifications published under subsection 

8 (a)(2), the Secretary shall9 "(1) where appropriate, cost-effective, and fea1 0 sible, obtain space weather data from commercial 

11 sector providers; 

12 "(2) as early as possible in the acquisition proc13 ess for any future National Oceanic and Atmos14 pheric. Adnllnistration space weather observational 

15 capabilit,y, consider whether a suitable, cost-effective, 

16 commercial capability is or will he available to meet 

17 the observational requirements by the planned oper18 ational elate of the system; 

19 "(3) if a suitable, cost-effective, conunercial ca20 pability is or will be available as described in para21 graph (2), determine whether it is in the national in22 terest to develop a governmental observational capa23 bility; and 

24 "(4) submit to the Committee on Science, 

25 Space, and Technology of the House of Representag:\VHLC\072018\072018.304.xml 

July 20, 2018 (4:10p.m.) 

{70346914) 
890 

0:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SP_WEATHER_ANS_Ol.XML 

18 

1 tives and the Committee on Conunerce, Science, and 

2 Transportation of the Senate a report detailing any 

3 determination made under paragraph (2) or (3). 

4 "(d) DATA SHARING PRACTICES.-

5 "(1) IN GENERAI~.-'l'he Secretary shall, to the 

6 extent practicable, leverage United States leadership 

7 in space weather observation and forecasting to 

8 incentivize international partners to increase their 

9 space weather observational and forecasting capabili10 ties and contribute additional space weather observa11 tions, data, models, predictions, and forecasts. The 

12 Under Secretary shall continue to meet international 

13 data sharing agreements entered into prior to the 

14 date of enactment of this Act. 

15 "(2) NASA AKD NSF DATA.-The Adminis16 trator of the National Aeronautics and Space Ad17 ministration and the Director of the National 

18 Science :F'oundation shall each make space weather 

19 related data obtained for scientific research purposes 

20 available to space weather forecasters, operations 

21 centers, and the eommercial seetor and support 

22 model development and model applications for space 

23 weather forecasting. 

g;WHLC\0720 1 8\072018.304.xml 

July 20,2018 (4:10p.m.) 

(70346914) 
891 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACE\SP _ WEA THER_ANS~Ol.XML 

19 

1 "(3) NOAA DATA.-'l'he Secretary shall make 

2 space weather related data obtained from Qperc 

3 ational forecasting available for scientific research. 

4 "(e) RESEARCH FOH IMPROVED SPACE WEATHEH 

5 Ji'ORliiOAS'l'ING.-'l'he Secretary, the Director of the Na6 tional Science F01mdation, and the Administrator of the 

7 National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall sup8 port research on observation, technolof,-.ies, and instrumen9 tation which. could improve space weather forecasting lead 

10 time and accuracy. 

11 "§ 60606. Definitions 

12 "In tlris chapter: 

13 "(1) NATIOXAL SPACE COUNCIJJ.~'J'he term 

14 'National Space Council' means the National Space 

15 Council established under JiJxecutive Order 13803, 

16 (82 Feel. Reg. 31429, relating to establishment of 

17 National Space Council) or any successor entities as 

18 determined by the President.". 

19 (b) TECIIXICAL Al'<D 00:\'FOHMING ~U1ND~Il<JN1'S.-

20 (1) 00WORMING Rl<iPEAL-Section 809 of the 

21 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Au22 thorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 18388) and the 

23 item relatiri.g to that section in the table of contents 

24 under section l(b) of that Act (124 Stat. 2806) are 

25 repealed. 

g:\VHLC\07201B\072018.304.xml 

July 20, 2018 (4:10p.m.) 

(70346914) 
892 

G:\CMTB\SC\15\SPACB\SP_WEATHER__ANS_Ol.XML 

20 

1 (2) TABI,:l!l 01•' CHAP'l'NRS.-'fhe table of ehap-

. 2 ters of title 51, United States Code, is amended by 

3 adding after the item relating to chapter 605 the fol4 lowing: 

"606. Space weather ......................................................................... 60601". 

Amerid the title so as to read: "An Act to improve 

understanding and forecasting· of space weather and promote coordination between stakeholders, and for other 

purposes.". 

g:IVHLC\07201 e\07201 6.304.xmt 

July 20, 2018 (4:10p.m.) 

{70346914) 
893 

G:\CMIEISC\151SPAC'.E\MANAGERS_002XML 

AMENDMENT TO THE PERLMUTTER AMENDMENT 

IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE TO S. 141 

OFFERED BY Mtt. Pe-fl LM ~rn: f?... 

Page 2, lines 1 through 7, amend to read as follows: 

1 "(2) The effects of severe space weather events 

2 on the electric power grid, satellites and satellite 

3 communications, services, orbits and information, 

4 airline operations, astronauts living and working in 

5 space, and spaee based position, navigation, and tim6 ing systems could have significant societal, economic, 

7 national security, and health impacts. 

Page 2, after line 7, insert the following (and make 

such conforming changes as may be necessary): 

8 "(3) Space weather observation and forecasting 

9 are essential for the success of deep space explo10 ration. 

Page 11, lines 10 through 12, amend to read as follows: 

11 "(3) identifY knowledge gaps and their rcsolu12 tion through specific research and development acg:\VHLC\072318\072318.305.xml 

July 23,2018 (9:18p.m.) 

(70390213) 
894 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SPACEIMANAGERS_002.XML 

2 

1 tivities to improve operational space weather fore2 casting; 

Page 11, lines 22 through 24, amend to read as follows: 

3 "(6) include a formal mechanism to share oper4 ational needs of space weather forecasters with Fed5 eral agencies engaged in space weather research and 

6 development activitieH, the academic community, and 

7 the commercial sector; and 

Pag'C 12, lines 12 and 13, amend to read as follows: 

8 "(3) considers the National Academy of 

9 Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's decadal surI 0 vey recommendations; 

Page 13, after line 24, insert the following: 

11 "(d) REVALUATION OF COXTENT.-Not later than 

12 one year after the date on which each Presidential term 

13 begins, as well as when determined to be necessary by the 

14 Chair of the National Space Council during· the inter15 vcning years, the applieable entities shall review and as16 sess the content. previously developed under this section 

17 and update and resubmit such content when appropriate. 

Page 19, lines 1 through 3, amend to read as follows: 

g:\VHL.C\072318\072318.305.xml 

July 23,2018 (9:18p.m.) 

(70390213) 
895 

G:\CMTE\SC\ 15\SPACE\MANAGERS_002.xML 

3 

1 "(3) NOAA DATA.-The Secretary shall work 

2 with the academic comm1mity to make spaee weath3 er t·elated data obtained from opemtional forecasting 

4 available for scicntifie research. 

Page 19, lines 4 through 10, amend to read as fo1-

lows: 

5 "(e) RESEARCH FOR li\'IPROVED SPACE WEA'l'HER 

6 FORECAS'l'ING.-'l'he Secretary, the Director of the Na7 tional Science Foundation, and the Administrator of the 

8 National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall sup9 port basic and applied 1·cscarch which could improve space 

10 weather foreca.,c::ting lead time and accuracy. 

g:\VHLC\072318\07231B.305.xml 

July 23, 2018 (9:18p.m.} 

(70390213) 
896 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

AMENDMENT IN THE NATURE OF A SUBSTITUTE 

OFFERED BY Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON 

OF TEXAS TO THE AMENDMENT IN THE NA· 

TURE OF A SUBSTITUTE OFFERED BY MR. 

PERLMUTTER 

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 

follmving: 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the "Space Weather Re3 search and Forecasting Act". 

4 SEC. 2. SPACE WEATHER. 

5 (a) IN GgNERAL.-Subtitle \71 of title 51, United 

6 States Code, is amended by adding after chapter 605 the 

7 following: 

8 "CHAPTER 607-SPACE WEATHER 

"Sec. 

"60701. Space weather. 

"60702. Observations and forecasting. 

"60703. Research and technology. 

"60704. Space weather data. 

9 "§ 60701. Space weather 

10 "(a) FINDINGS.-Congress makes the following find11 ings: 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
897 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

2 

"(1) Space weather events pose a significant 

2 threat to humans working in the space environment 

3 and to modern technological systems. 

4 "(2) The effects of severe space weather events 

5 on the electric power grid, satellites and satellite 

6 communications and information, airline operations, 

7 astronauts living and working in space, and space8 based position, navigation, and timing systems could 

9 have significant societal, economic, national security, 

10 and health impacts. 

11 "(3) Earth and space observations provide cru12 cial data necessary to prediet and warn about spaee 

13 weather events. 

14 "(4) Clear roles and accountability of Federal 

15 departments and ageneies are eritical for an efficient 

16 and effective response to threats posed by space 

17 weather. 

18 "(5) In October 2015, the National Science and 

19 Technology Council published a National Space 

20 Weather Strategy and a National Spaee Weather 

21 Action Plan seeking to integrate national space 

22 weather efforts and add new capabilities to meet in23 creasing demand for space weather information. 

24 "(b) FEDERAL AGENCY ROIJES.-

25 "(1) FINDINGS.-Congress finds thatg:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23.2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
898 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

3 

"(A) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration provides operational 

space weather forecasting and monitoring for 

civil applications, maintains ground and spacebased assets to provide observations needed for 

forecasting, prediction, and warnings, provides 

research to support operational responsibilities, 

and develops requirements for space weather 

forecasting technologies and science; 

"(B) the Department of Defense provides 

operational space weather forecasting, monitoring, and research for the department's 

unique missions and applications; 

"(C) the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration provides increased understanding of the fundamental physics of the 

Sun-Earth system through space-based observations and modeling, develops new space-based 

technologies and missions, and monitors space 

weather for NASA's space missions; 

"(D) the National Science Foundation provides increased understanding of the Sun-Earth 

system through b'TOund-based measurements, 

technologies, and modeling; 

(70378011) 
899 

G:\M\15\TOHNTE\TOHNTE_035.XML 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

4 

"(E) the Department of the Interior collects, distributes, and archives operational 

ground-based magnetometer data in the United 

States and its territories, works with the international community to improve global geophysical monitoring, and develops crustal conductivity models to assess and mitigate risk 

from space weather-induced electric ground currents; and 

"(F) the Federal Aviation Administration 

prm'ides operational requirements for space 

weather services in support of aviation and for 

coordination of these requirements with the 

International Civil Aviation Organization, integrates space weather data and produets into the 

Next Generation Air Transportation System, 

and eonduets real-time monitoring of the 

18 charged particle radiation environment to pro19 teet the health and safety of crew and pas20 sengers during spaee weather events. 

21 "(2) OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOIJOGY 

22 POLICY.-The Director of the Office of Science and 

23 Technology Policy shall24 "(A) coordinate the development and im25 plementation of Federal Government aetivities 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (1 0:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
900 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

5 

to improve the Nation's ability to prepare, 

avoid, mitigate, respond to, and recover from 

potentially devastating impacts of space weather events; and 

"(B) coordinate the activities of the space 

weather interagency working group established 

under subseetion (c). 

8 "(c) SPACE WEATHER INTERAGENCY WORIGNG 

9 GROUP.-In order to continue coordination of executive 

10 branch efforts to understand, prepare, coordinate, and 

11 plan for space weather, the National Science and Tech12 nology Council shall establish an interagency working 

13 group on space weather. 

14 "(d) MEMBERSIIIP.-In order to understand and re15 spond to the adverse effects of space weather, the inter16 agency working group established under subsection (c) 

17 shall leverage capabilities across participating Federal 

18 agencies, including19 "(1) the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad20 ministration; 

21 "(2) the National Aeronautics and Space Ad22 ministration; 

23 "(3) the National Science Foundation; 

24 " ( 4) the Department of Defense; 

25 "(5) the Department of the Interior; 

g:\VHLC\07231 8\07231 8.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (1 0:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
901 

G:\M\15\JOHNfE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

6 

"(6) the Department of Homeland Security; 

2 "(7) the Department of Energy; 

3 "(8) the Department of 'rransportation, includ4 ing the Federal Aviation Administration; and 

5 "(9) the Department of State. 

6 "(e) INTERAGENCY AGREEl\IENTS.-

7 "(1) SENSE OE' CONGRESS.-Jt is the sense of 

8 Congress that the interagency collaboration between 

9 the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

10 and the N ationai Oceanic and Atmospheric .Adminis11 tration on terrestrial weather observations pro12 vides13 "(A) an effective mechanism for improving 

14 weather and climate data collection while avoid15 ing unnecessary duplication of capabilities 

16 across Federal agencies; and 

17 "(B) an agency collaboration model that 

18 could benefit space weather observations. 

19 "(2) INTERAGENCY AGREEMENTS.-The Ad20 ministrator of the National Aeronautics and Space 

21 Administration and the Administrator of the Na22 tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shall 

23 enter into one or more interagency agreements pro24 viding for cooperation and collaboration in the devel25 opment of space weather spacecraft, instruments, 

g:\VHLC\0723181072318.042.xml 

July 23. 2018 (1 0:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
902 

G:IM\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

7 

and technologies and in the transition of research to 

2 operations in accordance with this chapter. 

3 "(f) INTERNATIONAL, COMi'llERCIAL, A.l'\D ACADEMIC 

4 Cou-'ABORATION.-Participating Federal agencies in the 

5 space weather interagency working group established 

6 under subsection (c) shall, to the eA'tent practicable and 

7 appropriate, increase eng·agement and cooperation with 

8 the international, commercial, and academic communities 

9 on the observational infrastructure, data, and scientific re1 0 search necessary to advance the characterization, pre11 diction, and mitigation of space weather events. 

12 "§ 60702. Observations and forecasting 

13 "(a) POI,JCY.-It is the policy of the United States 

14 to establish and sustain a baseline space and ground-based 

15 capability for space weather observations. 

16 "(b) INTEGRATED STRATEGY.-

17 "(1) IN GENERAL.-The Director of the Office 

18 of Science and Technology Policy, in coordination 

19 with the Administrator of the National Oceanic and 

20 Atmospheric Administration, the Administrator of 

21 the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 

22 the Director of the National Science :B~oundation, 

23 and the Secretary of Defense, and in consultation 

24 vvith the academic and commercial communities, 

25 shall develop an integrated strategy for space and 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23,2018 {10:50 a.m.) 

{70378011) 
903 

G:\M\l5\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

8 

1 ground-based spaee weather observations, ineluding 

2 solar and solar wind observations beyond the lifetime 

3 of eurrent assets, that eonsiders4 "(A) the provision of solar wind measure5 ments and other measurements essential to 

6 space weather forecasting; and 

7 "(B) the provision of solar and space 

8 weather measurements important for scientific 

9 purposes. 

10 "(2) CONSrDERATIOCIIS.-In developing the 

11 strategy under para!-,>Taph (1), the Director of the 

12 Offiee of Seienee and Teehnology Policy shall eon13 sider small satellite and mierosatellite options, 

14 hosted payloads, commercial options, international 

15 options, and prize authority. 

16 "(e) CRITICAij 0BSERVATIONS.-ln order to sustain 

17 current spaee-based observational eapabilities, the Admin18 istrator of the National Aerouauties and Spaee Adminis19 tration shall20 "(1) as appropriate, in cooperation with the 

21 European Space Agency, maintain operations of the 

22 Solar and Heliospheric Observatory/Large Angle and 

23 Spectrometric Coronagraph (referred to in this sec24 tion as 'SOHO/LASCO') for as long as the satellite 

25 continues to deliver quality observations; and 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23,2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
904 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

9 

"(2) prioritize the reception of lill.SCO data. 

2 "(d) AnmTIONAI" CAPAIHLITY FOR Sor~ IM.A.G3 ING.-

4 "(1) IN GENERAL.-The Administrator of the 

5 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

6 shall secure reliable secondary capability for near 

7 real-time coronal mass ejection imagery. 

8 "(2) 0PTIONS.-The Administrator of the Na9 tiona! Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in 

10 coordination "'ith the Secretary of Defense and the 

11 Administrator of the National Aeronautics and 

12 Space Administration, shall develop options, includ13 ing commercial solutions, to build and deploy one or 

14 more instruments for near real-time coronal mass 

15 ejection imagery. 

16 "(3) CONSIDI<JRATIONS.-ln developing options 

17 under paragraph (2), the Administrator of the Na18 tiona! Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shall 

19 consider commercial solutions, prize authority, aca20 demic and international partnerships, small satellites 

21 and microsatellites, ground-based instruments, and 

22 opportunities to deploy the instrument or instru23 ments as a secondary payload on an upcoming 

24 planned launch. 

g:IVHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (1 0:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
905 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

10 

"(4) COSTS.-In implementing paragraph (1), 

2 the Administrator of the National Oceanic and At3 mospheric Administration shall consider a cost-effec4 tive and reliable solution. 

5 "(5) OPERATIONAL PLA.~NING.-The Adminis6 trator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad7 ministration shall develop an operational contingency 

8 plan to provide continuous space weather forecasting 

9 in the event of a SOHO/LA.SCO failure. 

10 "(6) BRIEFING.-Not later than 120 days after 

11 the date of enactment of the Space ·weather Re12 search and Forecasting Act, the Administrator of 

13 the N a tiona! Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra14 tion shall provide a briefing to the Committee on 

15 Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Sen16 ate and the Committee on Science, Space, and Tech17 nology of the House of Representatives on the op18 tions for building and deploying the instrnment or 

19 instrnments described in paragraph (2) and the 

20 operational contingency plan developed under para21 graph (5). 

22 "(e) FOLLOW-ON SPACE-BASED OBSERVATIONS.-

23 "(1) PLA.~.-The Administrator of the National 

24 Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in coordi25 nation ·with the Secretary of Defense, shall develop 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23,2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
906 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

11 

1 requirements and a plan for follow-on space-based 

2 observations for operational purposes, in accordance 

3 with the integrated strategy developed under sub4 section (b). 

5 "(2) RI<JSEARCH NEEDS.-ln developing the re6 quirements and plan under paragraph (1 ), the Ad7 ministrator of the National Oceanic and Atmos8 pheric Administration shall coordinate with the Na9 tiona! Aeronautics and Space Administration and 

10 the National Science I<,oundation regarding the re11 search necessary to improve space weather fore12 casting and the space-based observations that will 

13 advance research and development. 

14 "(f) REPORT.-Not later than 180 days after the 

15 date of enactment of the Space Weather Research and 

16 I<,orecasting Act, the Director of the Office of Science and 

17 Technology Policy shall submit to the Committee on Com18 merce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the 

19 Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the 

20 House of Representatives a report on the integrated strat21 egy under subsection (b), including the Plan for follow22 on space-based observations under subsection (e). 

23 "(g) REVIEW OF INTEGRATED STRA'l'EGY.-

24 "(1) REVIEW.-The Director of the Natioual 

25 Science Foundation, in conjunction with Federal 

g:IVHLC\0723181072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (1 0:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
907 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

12 

1 agenCies participating in the space weather inter2 agency working group established under section 

3 60701(c), shall enter into an agreement "rith the 

4 National Academies to review the integTated strat5 egy developed under subsection (b). 

6 "(2) TRANSMITTAL.-The Director of the Na7 tional Science l<'oundation shall transmit the results 

8 of the review required under paragraph (1) to the 

9 Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the 

10 House of Hepresentatives and the Committee on 

11 Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Sen12 ate not later than 18 months after the enactment of 

13 the Space W eatber Research and Forecasting Act. 

14 "(h) GROUND-BASED 0BSERVATIONS.-The Na15 tional Science I<'oundation, the Air Force, and, where 

16 practicable in support of the Air Force, the Navy shall 

17 each18 "(1) maintain and improve, as necessary and 

19 advisable, ground-based observations of the Sun in 

20 order to help meet the priorities identified in section 

21 60703(a); and 

22 "(2) provide space weather data by means of its 

23 set of ground-based facilities, including radars, 

24 lidars, magnetometers, radio receivers, aurora and 

g:IVHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (1 0:50a.m.) 

(70378011) 
908 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

13 

1 airglow imagers, spectrometers, interferometers, and 

2 solar observatories. 

3 "(i) GROUND-BASED OBSERVATIONS DATA.-The 

4 National Science :F'oundation shall5 "(1) provide key data streams from the plat6 forms described in subsection (h) for research and to 

7 support space weather model development; 

8 "(2) develop experimental models for scientific 

9 purposes; and 

10 "(3) support the transition of the experimental 

11 models to operations where appropriate. 

12 "§60703. Research and technology 

13 "{a) USER NEEDS.-

14 "(1) IN GENERAh-The Administrator of the 

15 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 

16 the Secretary of the Air F'orce, and where prac17 ticahle in support of the Air Force, the Secretary of 

18 the Navy, in conjunction with the Administrator of 

19 the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

20 and the heads of other relevant Federal agencies, 

21 shall conduct a comprehensive survey to identify and 

22 prioritize the needs of space weather forecast users, 

23 including· space weather data and space weather 

24 forecast data needed to improve services and inform 

25 research priorities and technology needs. 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (1 0:50a.m.) 

(70378011) 
909 

G:IM\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

14 

"(2) CoNTENTS.-Iu conducting the com2 prehensive survey under paragraph (1), the Adminis3 trator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad4 ministration, the Secretary of the Air Force, and 

5 where practicable in support of the Air Force, the 

6 Secretary of the Navy, at a minimum, shall7 "(A) consider the goals for forecast lead 

8 time, accuracy, coverage, timeliness, data rate, 

9 and data quality for space weather obsenra10 tions; 

11 "(B) identify opportunities to address the 

12 needs identified under paragraph (1) through 

13 collaborations with academia, the commercial 

14 sector, and the international community; 

15 "(C) identifY opportunities for new tech16 nologies, research, and instrumentation to ad17 dress the needs identified under paragTaph (1); 

18 and 

19 ''(D) publish a report on the findings 

20 under subparagraphs (A) through (C). 

21 "(3) PTJBLICATION.-Not later than 1 year 

22 after the date of enactment of the Space Weather 

23 Research and Forecasting Act, the Administrator of 

24 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra25 tion, the Secretary of the Air Force, and where pracg:\VHLC\07231 8\07231 8.042.xml 

Julv 23. 201A 110:50 Am\ 

(70378011} 
910 

G:IM\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

15 

ticable in support of the Air Force, the Secretary of 

2 the Navy, shall3 "(A) make the results of the comprehen4 sive survey publicly available; and 

5 "(B) notify the Committee on Commerce, 

6 Science, and Transportation of the Senate and 

7 the Committee on Science, Space, and Tech8 nology of the House of Representatives of the 

9 publication under subparagraph (A). 

10 "(b) HESEARCH ACTIVITIES.-

11 "(1) BASIC RESEARCH.-The Director of the 

12 National Science Foundation, Administrator of the 

13 National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and 

14 the Secretary of Defense shall continue to carry out 

15 basic research activities on heliophysies, geospace 

16 science, and space weather and support competitive, 

17 merit-based, peer-reviewed proposals for research, 

18 modeling, and monitoring of space weather and its 

19 impacts, including science goals outlined in Solar 

20 and Space Physics Decadal surveys conducted by the 

21 National Academy of Sciences. 

22 "(2) OTHER RESEARCH ACTIVITIES.-The Di23 rector of the National Science Foundation and the 

24 Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmos25 pheric Administration shall support basic research 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
911 

G:\M\l5\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

16 

activities in the social, behavioral, and economic 

2 sciences that will lead to improved national pre3 paredness and encourage mitigation and protection 

4 measures before a space weather event. 

5 "(3) MULTIDISCIPLI~ARY RESEARCII.-

6 "(A) FINDINGS.-Congress finds that the 

7 multidisciplinary nature of solar and space 

8 physics creates funding challenges that require 

9 coordination across scientific disciplines and 

10 Federal agencies. 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

"(B) MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH.-

The Director of the National Science Foundation, the Administrator of the National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration, and the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration shall pursue multidisciplinary, coordinated research in subjects that 

further our understanding of solar physics, 

space physics, and space weather. 

"(C) SENSE OF CONGRESS.-Jt IS the 

sense of Congress that the Administrator of the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

and Director of the National Science Foundation should support competitively awarded 

(70378011) 
912 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

17 

1 Hcliophysics Science Centers that support re2 search to operations and operations to research. 

3 "(c) SCIENCE MISSIONS.-The Administrator of the 

4 National Aeronautics and Space Administration shall seck 

5 to implement missions that meet the science objectives 

6 identified in Solar and Space Physics Deeadal surveys eon7 ducted by the National Academy of Sciences. 

8 "(d) RESEARCH TO OPERATIONS.-

9 "(1) IN GE;"~~ERAL.-The Administrator of the 

10 National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the 

11 Director of the National Science Foundation, the 

12 Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmos13 pheric Administration, the Secretary of the Air 

14 Foree, and where practicable in support of the Air 

15 Porcc, the Secretary of the Navy, sha.ll16 "(A) develop a formal mechanism to tran17 sition National Aeronautics and Space Adminis18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

g:IVHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

tration, National Science Foundation, Air 

Force, and Navy research findings, research 

needs, models, and capabilities, as appropriate, 

to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Department of Defense space 

weather operational forecasting centers; and 

(70378011) 
913 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

2 

3 

4 

18 

"(B) enhance coordination between research modeling centers and forecasting centers. 

"(2) OPERATIONAL NEEDS.-The Adminis5 trator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad6 ministration and the Secretary of Defense, in coordi7 nation with the Administrator of the National Aero8 nautics and Space Administration and the Director 

9 of the National Science Foundation, shall develop a 

10 formal mechanism to communicate the operational 

11 needs of space weather forecasters to the research 

12 community. 

13 "(e) TECHNOI,OGY DEVJ<}I,OPMENT.-

14 "(1) :B'INDINGS.-Congress finds that observa15 tions and measurements closer to the Sun and ad16 vanced instrumentation would provide for more ad17 vanced warning of space weather disturbances (as 

18 defined in section 3 of the Space \Veather Research 

19 and Forecasting Act). 

20 "(2) TECHNOLOGY AND INSTRUMENTATION DE21 VELOPMENT.-The Administrator of the National 

22 Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Di23 rector of the National Science Foundation shall sup24 port the development of technologies and instrumen25 tation that address research priorities and improve 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (1 0:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
914 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_03S.XML 

19 

1 space weather forecasting lead-time and accuracy to 

2 meet the needs identified by the Administrator of 

3 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra4 tion. 

5 "§ 60704. Space weather data 

6 "(a) IN GENERAL.-The Administrator of the Na7 tiona! Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Di8 rector of the National Science Foundation shall9 "(1) make space weather related data obtained 

10 for scientific research purposes available to space 

11 weather forecasters and operations centers; and 

12 "(2) support model development and model ap13 plications to spaee weather forecasting. 

14 "(b) RESEARCH.-The Administrator of the National 

15 Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shall make spaee 

16 weather related data obtained from operational forecasting 

17 available for scientific research. 

18 "(e) SPACE WEATHER GovERNMENT-INDUSTRY19 UNIVERSITY ROUNDTABLE.-The Administrator of the 

20 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in col21 laboration with the Administrator of the National Aero22 nautics and Space Administration and the Director of the 

23 National Science Foundation, shall enter into an arrange24 ment with the N a tiona! Academies to establish a Space 

25 Weather Government-Industry-University Roundtable to 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
915 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

20 

1 facilitate communication and knowledge transfer among 

2 Government participants in the space weather interagency 

3 working group established under section 60701(c), indus4 try, and academia to----

5 "(1) facilitate advances m space weather pre6 diction and forecasting; 

7 "(2) help enable the 2-way coordination of re8 search and operations; and 

9 "(3) improve preparedness for potential space 

10 weather events.". 

11 (b) TECHNICAL Ai\TD CONFORMING AtVIENDl\IENTS.-

12 (1) REPF..AL Ol<' SECTION 809.-Section 809 of 

13 the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

14 Authorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 18388) and 

15 the item relating to that section in the table of con16 tents under section 1 (b) of that Act ( 124 Stat. 

17 2806) are repealed. 

18 (2) TABLE OP CHAPTERS.-The table of chap19 ters of title 51, United States Code, is amended by 

20 adding after the item relating to chapter 605 the fol21 lowing: 

"607. Space weathe1· ................................................................................ G070l ". 

22 SEC. 3. SPACE WEATHER METRICS. 

23 (a) DEFINITIONS.-ln this section: 

24 (1) SPACE WEATHER DISTURBANCE.-Thc term 

25 "space weather disturbance" includes geo-electric 

g:\VHLC\07231 B\07231 B.042.xml 

July 23,2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
916 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

21 

fields, ionizing radiation, ionospheric disturbances, 

2 solar radio bursts, and upper atmospheric expansion. 

3 (2) SPACE vVEATHEH BENCHlVIARK.-The term 

4 "space weather benchmark" means the physical 

5 characteristics and conditions describing the nature, 

6 frequency, and intensity of space weather disturb7 auces. 

8 (b) BENCHMARKS.-

9 (1) PHELBHNARY.-Not later than 90 days 

10 after the date of enactment of this Act, the space 

11 weather interagency working group established 

12 under section 60701 (c) of title 51, United States 

13 Code, in consultation with academic and commercial 

14 experts, shallIS (A) assess existing data, the historical 

16 record, models, and peer-reviewed studies on 

17 space weather; and 

18 (B) develop preliminary benchmarks, based 

19 on current scientific understanding and the his20 torical record, for measuring solar disturbances. 

21 (2) FINAL.-Not later than 18 months after 

22 the date the preliminary benchmarks are developed 

23 under paragraph (1), the space weather interagency 

24 working group shall publish final benchmarks. 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
917 

G:\M\!5\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

22 

(3) REVIEW.-The Administrator of the Na2 tional Aeronautics and Space Administration shall 

3 contract with the National Acadern.y of Sciences to 

4 review the benchmarks established under paragraph 

5 (2). 

6 (4) REVISIONS.-The space weather inter7 agency working group shall update and revise the 

8 final benchmarks under paragraph (2), as necessary, 

9 based on1 0 (A) the results of the review under para11 graph (3); 

12 (B) any significant new data or advances 

13 m scientific understanding that become avail14 able; or 

15 (C) the evolving needs of entities impacted 

16 by solar disturbances. 

17 SEC. 4. PROTECTION OF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE. 

18 (a) IN 0-ENERAL.-The Administrator of the Na19 tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in con20 sultation with the heads of other relevant I<,ederal agen21 cies, shall provide information about space weather haz22 ards to the Secretary of Homeland Security for purposes 

23 of this section. 

24 (b) CRITICAL lNFRASTRTJCTURE.-The Secretary of 

25 Homeland Seclll'ity, in consultation with sector-specific 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
918 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

agencies, the Administrator of the National Oeeanie and 

2 Atmospheric Administration, and the heads of other rei3 evant agencies, shall4 ( 1) include, in meeting national critical infra5 structure reporting requirements, an assessment of 

6 the vulnerability of critical infrastmeture to space 

7 weather events, as described by the space weather 

8 benchmarks under section 3; and 

9 (2) support critical infrastructure providers in 

10 managing the risks and impacts associated with 

11 space weather. 

12 (e) PROHIBITION ON NEW REGFLATORY AUTHOR13 ITY.-Nothing in subsection (b) may be construed to grant 

14 the Secretary of Homeland Security any authority to proIS mulgate regulations that was not in effect on the day be16 fore the date of enactment of this Act. 

17 (d) DEFINITION OF SECTOR-SPECIPIC AGENCY.-In 

18 this section, the term "sector-specific agency" has the 

19 meaning given the term in Presidential Policy Directive20 21 of February 12, 2013 (Critical Infrastructure Security 

21 and Resilience), or any successor. 

22 SEC. 5. PROTECTION OF NATIONAL SECURITY ASSETS. 

23 (a) IN GI<JN:FJRAL.-The National Security Council, in 

24 consultation with the Office of the Director of National 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23,2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
919 

G:\M\ 15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035 .XML 

24 

Intelligence, the Secretary of Defense, and the heads of 

2 other relevant Federal agencies, shall3 (1) assess the vulnerability of the national secu4 rity community to space weather events, as described 

5 by the space weather benchmarks under section 3; 

6 and 

7 (2) develop national security mechanisms to 

8 protect national security assets from space weather 

9 threats. 

10 (b) COOPERATION.-The Secretary of Defense, in 

11 consultation ·with the heads of other relevant Federal 

12 agencies, shall provide information about space weather 

13 hazards to the National Security Council, Director of Na14 tiona! Intelligence, and heads of Defense Agencies for purlS poses of this section. 

16 SEC. 6. ENSURING THE SAFETY OF CIVIL AVIATION. 

17 (a) IN GENERAL.-'l'he Administrator of the Federal 

18 Aviation Administration, in consultation with the heads of 

19 other relevant l<.,ederal agencies, shall20 (1) assess the safety implications and vulner21 ability of the national airspace system by space 

22 weather events, as described by the space weather 

23 benchmarks under section 3; 

24 (2) assess methods to mitigate the safety impli25 cations and effects of space weather on aviation 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23, 2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
920 

G:\M\15\JOHNTE\JOHNTE_035.XML 

25 

communication systems, aircraft navigation systems, 

2 satellite and ground-based navigation systems, and 

3 potential health effects of radiation exposure; and 

4 (3) assess options for incorporating space 

5 weather into operational training for pilots, cabin 

6 crew, dispatchers, air traffic controllers, meteorolo7 gists, and engineers. 

8 {b) SPACE WEATHER OOMlVIUNICATION.-The Ad9 ministrator of the .B'ederal Aviation Administration, in 

10 consultation with the heads of other relevant .B'ederal 

11 agencies, shall develop methods to increase the interaction 

12 between the aviation community and the space weather re13 search and service provider community. 

g:\VHLC\072318\072318.042.xml 

July 23,2018 (10:50 a.m.) 

(70378011) 
921 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\CHEM_005.XML 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H.R. 

(Original Signature of McmUer) 

To direct that certain assessments ~~th respect to toxicity of chemicals be 

carried out by the program offices of the Environmental Protection 

Agency, and for other puq)Oses. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

M_. introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on--~~--~-~----

A BILL 

To direct that certain assessments with respect to toxicity 

of chemicals be carried out by the program offices of 

the Environmental Protection Agency, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Rep1·esenta2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the "Improving Science in 

5 Chemical Assessments Act''. 

g:\VHLC\071918\071918.379.xml 

July 19,2018 (6:33p.m.) 

(70353012) 
922 

G:\CMTE\SC\!5\SCIENCE\CHEM_005.XML 

2 

1 SEC. 2. RESEARCH NEEDS AND PRIORITIES OF EPA PRO2 GRAM OFFICES. 

3 The Environmental Research, Development, and 

4 Demonstration Authorization Act is amended by striking 

5 section 7 (42 U.S.C. 4364) and inserting the following: 

6 "SEC. 7. RESEARCH NEEDS AND PRIORITIES OF EPA PRO7 GRAM OFFICES. 

8 "(a) IN GENERAL.-The Administrator of the Envi9 ronmental Protection Agency shall assure that the expend10 iture of any funds appropriated pursuant to this Act or 

11 any other provision of law for environmental research and 

12 development related to regulatory program activities shall 

13 be coordinated with and reflect the research needs and pri14 orities of the relevant program offices, as well as the overIS all research needs and priorities of the Agency, including 

16 those defined in the five-year research plan. 

17 "(b) HAzARD IDENTIFICA'fiON AND DOSE RESPONSE 

18 ASSESSMENTS.-Beginning on the date of the enactment 

19 of the Improving Science in Chemical Assessments Act, 

20 any covered assessments carried out with respect to a 

21 chemical substance through the Integrated Risk Informa22 tion System program of the Environmental Protection 

23 Agency as of the day before such date of enactment shall, 

24 in lieu of being carried out through such program, be car25 ried out by the relevant program office of the Environ26 mental Protection Agency, so long as the relevant program 

g:\VHLC\071918\071918.379.xml 

July 19, 2018 (6:33p.m.) 

(70353012) 
923 

G:\CMTE\SC\ 15\SCIENCE\CHEM_005.XML 

3 

1 office determines there is a need for such an assessment. 

2 Such an assessment shall be carried out using the sci3 entific standards specified in section 7B and be based on 

4 the weight of the scientific evidence. 

5 "(c) TOXICITY VALUI<JS.-In carrying out a covered 

6 assessment with respect to a chemical substance under 

7 subsection (a), the relevant program office shall assign a 

8 toxicity value or values, when scientifically supported by 

9 the available data, for such chemical substance. With re1 0 spcct to that assignment, the following shall apply: 

11 "(1) When supported by the available data, the 

12 toxicity value or values shall include a range of point 

13 estimates of risk as well as sourees and magnitudes 

14 of uncertainty associated with the estimates. 

15 "(2) When multiple point estimates can be de16 veloped, the relevant program office shall17 "(A) consider all datasets; and 

18 "(B) make a determination about how best 

19 to represent the human health risk posed by the 

20 chemical substance involved. 

21 "(d) CHEMICAL AsSESSMENT DATABASE.-

22 "(1) IN GENERAL.-A toxicity value or values 

23 assigned to a chemical substance under subsection 

24 (c) shall be included in a chemical assessment data25 base to be maintained by the Office of Research and 

g:\VHLC\071918\071918.379.xml 

July 19,2018 (6:33p.m.) 

(70353012) 
924 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\CHEM_OOS.XML 

4 

Development of the Environmental Protection Agen2 cy. 

3 "(2) COMPIA•JTED ASSESSlVIENTS.-All cowred 

4 assessments stored, as of the date of the enactment 

5 of this Act, in the IRIS database of the Environ6 mental Protection Agency shall be retained iu the 

7 chemical assessment database established pursuant 

8 to paragraph (1). 

9 "(3) UPDATES.-Such database shall be up1 0 dated pursuant to a covered assessment performed 

11 by a relevant program office, including to make a 

12 change in the existing toxicity value or values for a 

13 chemical substance included in such database. 

14 "(e) CERTIFICATION.-Beginning 2 years after the 

15 date of the enactment of the Imprnving Science in Chem16 ical Assessments Act and every 2 years thereafter, the Of17 fice of RBsearch and Development of the Environmental 

18 Protection Agency shall submit to the Committee on 

19 Science, Space, and Technology and the Committee on 

20 Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives 

21 and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of 

22 the Senate, a report containing a certification that each 

23 covered assessment completed during the period covered 

24 by the report was conducted using the scientific standards 

25 specified in section 7R. 

g:\VHLC\071918\071918.379.xml 

July 19, 2018 (6:33 p.m.) 

(70353012) 
925 

G:\CMTE\SO 15\SCIENCE\CHEM_OOS.XML 

5 

"(f) DEF'INITIONS.-In this section: 

2 "(1) The term 'covered assessment' means, with 

3 respect to the evaluation of the human health effects 

4 resulting from chronic exposure to a chemical subS stance, a chemical hazard identification and dose re6 spouse assessment (as such terms are defined by the 

7 Environmental Protection Agency on the day before 

8 the date of the enactment of this Act). 

9 "(2) The term 'relevant program office' in10 eludes the follo-wing offices of the Environmental 

11 Protection Agency: 

12 "(A) The Office of Water. 

13 "(B) The Office of Air and Radiation. 

14 "(C) The Office of Land and Emergency 

15 Management. 

16 "(D) The Office of Chemical Safety and 

17 Pollution Prevention. 

18 "(E) Any successor to an office specified in 

19 subparagraphs (A) through (D) and any other 

20 office determined to be relevant by the Adminis21 trator of the Environmental Protection Agency. 

22 "SEC. 7A. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND DOSE RESPONSE 

23 STEERING COMMITTEE. 

24 "(a) ESTABLISHl\fENT.-Not later than 30 days after 

25 the date of the enactment of this Act, the Administrator 

g:\VHLC\071918\07191 B.379.xml 

July 19,2016 (6:33p.m.) 

(70353012) 
926 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\CHEM_005.XML 

6 

of the Environmental Protection Agency shall establish a 

2 chemical hazard identification and dose response steering 

3 committee (referred to in this Act as the 'steering com4 mittee') to coordinate the conduct of covered assessments 

5 by relevant program offices for purposes of ensuring that, 

6 ·with respect to such assessments, there is no duplication 

7 of effort by such offices. 

8 "(h) DUTY.-The duties of the steering committee 

9 are the following: 

10 "(1) If the steering committee learns that more 

11 than one relevant program office intends to conduct 

12 covered assessments with respect to the same chem13 ical substance, the steering committee shall deter14 mine the most effective means of carrying out a sin15 gle covered assessment to prevent duplication of ef16 fort by such offices. 

17 "(2) For purposes of supplementing a covered 

18 assessment, the steering committee shall consider 

19 any third-party assessment of a chemical substance 

20 generated by another Federal, State, or inter21 national agency or ag·encies or members of the sci22 entif:ic community that meets the requirements spec23 if:ied in subsection (e). 

24 "(c) CHAIR; COMPOSITION.-

g:\VHLC\071918\071918.379.xml 

July 19, 2018 (6:33p.m.) 

(70353012) 
927 

G:\CMTE\S015\SCIENCE\CHEM_005.XML 

7 

"(1) OHAIR.-The steering committee shall be 

2 chaired by the Assistant Administrator of the Office 

3 of Research and Development of the Environmental 

4 Protection Agency. 

5 "(2) COMPOSITION.-The steering committee 

6 shall be composed of 15 members, all of whom shall 

7 be active, full-time employees of the Environmental 

8 Protection Agency, with at least one member rep9 resenting each relevant program office and each re10 gional office of the Environmental Protection Agen11 cy. The members of the steering committee shall be 

12 appointed by the Administrator of the Environ13 mental Protection ~~ency. Any vacancy shall be 

14 filled in the same manner as the initial appointment. 

15 "(d) MEI<JTINGS.-The steering committee shall meet 

16 at least once each calendar year. 

17 "(e) THIRD PARTY ASSESSMENT RI<JQUIREMENTS.-

18 The requirements specified iu this subsection with respect 

19 to a third-party assessment of a chemical substance are 

20 that the assessment -

21 "(1) is conducted using scientific standards 

22 specified in section 7B; 

23 "(2) has undergone independent scientific re24 view for transparency, completeness, and quality; 

25 and 

g:IVHLC\071918\071918.379.xml 

July 19, 2018 (6:33 p.m.) 

(70353012) 
928 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCJENCE\CHEM_OOS.XML 

8 

1 "(3) reflects the best available science and the 

2 weight of the available scientific evidence. 

3 "SEC. 7B. SCIENTIFIC STANDARDS. 

4 " Covered assessments carried out under section 7 

5 and discussion of such assessments and review of third 

6 party assessments carried out under seetion 7 A, shall be 

7 conducted using scientific information, teelmical proce8 dures, measures, methods, protocols, methodologies, or 

9 models in a manner consistent with the best available 

10 science. In carrying· out such an assessment, the relevant 

11 program office shall integrate all lines of scientific evi12 dence and consider, as applicable13 "(1) the e:x.i;ent to which the scientific informa14 tion, technical procedures, measures, methods, proto15 cols, methodologies, or models employed to generate 

16 the scientific information arc reasonable for and con17 sistent with the intended use of the scientific infor18 mation; 

19 "(2) the extent to which the scientific informa20 tion is relevant for the relevant program office's use 

21 in making a decision about a chemical substance; 

22 "(3) the degree of clarity and completeness with 

23 which the data, assumptions, methods, quality assur24 auce, analyses employed to generate the scientific in25 formation are documented and publicly available in 

g:\VHLC\071918\07191 8.379.xml 

July 19, 2018 (6:33 p.m.) 

(70353012) 
929 

Æ 

G:\CMTE\SC\15\SCIENCE\CHEM_OOS.XML 

9 

1 a manner that honors legal and ethical obligations to 

2 reduce the risks of unauthorized disclosure and re3 identification; 

4 "(4) the extent to which the variability and un5 certainty in the scientific information, or in the pro6 cedures, measures, methods, protocols, methodolo7 gies, or models, are evaluated and characterized; 

8 "(5) the extent of independent verification or 

9 peer review of the scientific information or of the 

10 procedures, measures, methods, protocols, meth11 odologies, or models; 

12 "(6) the ability of the scientific findings and rc13 search to be replicated or reproduced; and 

14 "(7) the extent to which the available scientific 

15 information supports dose-response modeling, using 

16 non-linear approaches.". 

g:\VHLC\071918\071918.379.xml 

July 19,2018 (6:33p.m.) 

(70353012)