H. R. 2272—142 
graduate fellowships and student financial assistance 
under titles IV and VII of the Higher Education Act of 
1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070 et seq., 1133 et seq.). 
(3) PREFERENCES.—The Director shall give preference in 
making awards to 4-year institutions of higher education 
seeking Federal funding to create or improve professional 
science master’s degree programs, to those applicants— 
(A) located in States with low percentages of citizens 
with graduate or professional degrees, as determined by 
the Bureau of the Census, that demonstrate success in 
meeting the unique needs of the corporate, non-profit, and 
government communities in the State, as evidenced by 
providing internships for professional science master’s 
degree students or similar partnership arrangements; or 
(B) that secure more than two-thirds of the funding 
for such professional science master’s degree programs from 
sources other than the Federal Government. 
(4) NUMBER OF GRANTS; TIME PERIOD OF GRANTS.— 
(A) NUMBER OF GRANTS.—Subject to the availability 
of appropriated funds, the Director shall award grants 
under paragraph (1) to a maximum of 200 4-year institu-
tions of higher education. 
(B) TIME PERIOD OF GRANTS.—Grants awarded under 
this section shall be for one 3-year term. Grants may be 
renewed only once for a maximum of 2 additional years. 
(5) EVALUATION AND REPORTS.— 
(A) DEVELOPMENT
OF
PERFORMANCE
BENCHMARKS.— 
Prior to the start of the grant program, the Director, in 
collaboration with 4-year institutions of higher education 
(including applicable graduate schools and academic 
departments), and industries and Federal agencies that 
employ science-trained personnel, shall develop perform-
ance benchmarks to evaluate the pilot programs assisted 
by grants under this section. 
(B) EVALUATION.—For each year of the grant period, 
the Director, in consultation with 4-year institutions of 
higher education (including applicable graduate schools and 
academic departments), and industries and Federal agen-
cies that employ science-trained personnel, shall complete 
an evaluation of each program assisted by grants under 
this section. Any program that fails to satisfy the perform-
ance benchmarks developed under subparagraph (A) shall 
not be eligible for further funding. 
(C) REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the comple-
tion of an evaluation described in subparagraph (B), the 
Director shall submit a report to Congress that includes— 
(i) the results of the evaluation; and 
(ii) recommendations for administrative and legis-
lative action that could optimize the effectiveness of 
the pilot programs, as the Director determines to be 
appropriate. 
SEC. 7035. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON COMMUNICATIONS TRAINING FOR 
SCIENTISTS. 
(a) SENSE
OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress that 
institutions of higher education receiving awards under the Integra-
tive Graduate Education and Research Traineeship program of
H. R. 2272—143 
the Foundation should, among the activities supported under these 
awards, train graduate students in the communication of the sub-
stance and importance of their research to nonscientist audiences. 
(b) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 3 years after the 
date of enactment of this Act, the Director shall transmit a report 
to the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of Rep-
resentatives and to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 
and Pensions of the Senate, describing the training programs 
described in subsection (a) provided to graduate students who 
participated in the Integrative Graduate Education and Research 
Traineeship program. The report shall include data on the number 
of graduate students trained and a description of the types of 
activities funded. 
SEC. 7036. MAJOR RESEARCH INSTRUMENTATION. 
(a) AWARD AMOUNT.—The minimum amount of an award under 
the Major Research Instrumentation program shall be $100,000. 
The maximum amount of an award under the program shall be 
$4,000,000 except if the total amount appropriated for the program 
for a fiscal year exceeds $125,000,000, in which case the maximum 
amount of an award shall be $6,000,000. 
(b) USE
OF
FUNDS.—In addition to the acquisition of 
instrumentation and equipment, funds made available by awards 
under the Major Research Instrumentation program may be used 
to support the operations and maintenance of such instrumentation 
and equipment. 
(c) COST SHARING.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—An institution of higher education 
receiving an award under the Major Research Instrumentation 
program shall provide at least 30 percent of the cost from 
private or non-Federal sources. 
(2) EXCEPTIONS.—Institutions of higher education that are 
not Ph.D.-granting institutions are exempt from the cost 
sharing requirement in paragraph (1), and the Director may 
reduce or waive the cost sharing requirement for— 
(A) institutions— 
(i) that are not ranked among the top 100 institu-
tions receiving Federal research and development 
funding, as documented by the statistical data pub-
lished by the Foundation; and 
(ii) for which the proposed project will make a 
substantial improvement in the institution’s capabili-
ties to conduct leading edge research, to provide 
research experiences for undergraduate students using 
leading edge facilities, and to broaden the participation 
in science and engineering research by individuals 
identified in section 33 or 34 of the Science and 
Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a 
or 1885b); and 
(B) consortia of institutions of higher education that 
include at least one institution that is not a Ph.D.-granting 
institution. 
SEC. 7037. LIMIT ON PROPOSALS. 
(a) POLICY.—For programs supported by the Foundation that 
require as part of the selection process for awards the submission 
of preproposals and that also limit the number of preproposals
H. R. 2272—144 
that may be submitted by an institution, the Director shall allow 
the subsequent submission of a full proposal based on each 
preproposal that is determined to have merit following the Founda-
tion’s merit review process. 
(b) REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT OF POLICIES.—The Board shall 
review and assess the effects on institutions of higher education 
of the policies of the Foundation regarding the imposition of limita-
tions on the number of proposals that may be submitted by a 
single institution for programs supported by the Foundation. The 
Board shall determine whether current policies are well justified 
and appropriate for the types of programs that limit the number 
of proposal submissions. Not later than 1 year after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Board shall summarize the Board’s 
findings and any recommendations regarding changes to the current 
policy on the restriction of proposal submissions in a report to 
the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of Rep-
resentatives and to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, 
and Pensions of the Senate. 
TITLE VIII—GENERAL PROVISIONS 
SEC. 8001. COLLECTION OF DATA RELATING TO TRADE IN SERVICES. 
(a) REPORT.—Not later than January 31, 2008, the Secretary 
of Commerce, acting through the Director of the Bureau of Economic 
Analysis, shall report to Congress on the feasibility, annual cost, 
and potential benefits of a program to collect and study data relating 
to export and import of services. 
(b) PROGRAM.—The proposed program to be studied under sub-
section (a) shall include requirements that the Secretary annually— 
(1) provide data collection and analysis relating to export 
and import of services; 
(2) collect and analyze data for service imports and exports 
in not less than 40 service industry categories, on a State- 
by-State basis; 
(3) collect data on, and analyze, the employment effects 
of exports and imports on the service industry; and 
(4) integrate ongoing and planned data collection and anal-
ysis initiatives in research and development and innovation. 
SEC. 8002. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING SMALL BUSINESS 
GROWTH AND CAPITAL MARKETS. 
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds that— 
(1) the United States has the most fair, most transparent, 
and most efficient capital markets in the world, in part due 
to its strong securities statutory and regulatory scheme; 
(2) it is of paramount importance for the continued growth 
of the economy of the Nation, that our capital markets retain 
their leading position in the world; 
(3) small businesses are vital participants in United States 
capital markets, and play a critical role in future economic 
growth and high-wage job creation; 
(4) section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has 
greatly enhanced the quality of corporate governance and finan-
cial reporting for public companies and increased investor con-
fidence;
H. R. 2272—145 
(5) the Securities and Exchange Commission (referred to 
in this section as the ‘‘Commission’’) and the Public Company 
Accounting Oversight Board (referred to in this section as the 
‘‘PCAOB’’) have both determined that the current auditing 
standard implementing section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 
of 2002 has imposed unnecessary and unintended cost burdens 
on small and mid-sized public companies; 
(6) the Commission and the PCAOB are now near comple-
tion of a 2-year process intended to revise the auditing standard 
in order to provide more efficient and effective regulation; and 
(7) the Chairman of the Commission recently has said, 
with respect to section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 
that, ‘‘We don’t need to change the law, we need to change 
the way the law is implemented. It is the implementation 
of the law that has caused the excessive burden, not the law 
itself. That’s an important distinction. I don’t believe these 
important investor protections, which are even now only a 
few years old, should be opened up for amendment, or that 
they need to be.’’. 
(b) SENSE OF THE SENATE.—It is the sense of the Senate that 
the Commission and the PCAOB should complete promulgation 
of the final rules implementing section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley 
Act of 2002 (15 U.S.C. 7262). 
SEC. 8003. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE REVIEW OF 
ACTIVITIES, GRANTS, AND PROGRAMS. 
Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of this 
Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit 
a report to Congress that— 
(1) assesses and evaluates the effectiveness of a representa-
tive sample of the new or expanded programs and activities 
(including programs and activities carried out under grants) 
required to be carried out under this Act; and 
(2) includes such recommendations as the Comptroller Gen-
eral determines are appropriate to ensure effectiveness of, or 
improvements to, the programs and activities, including termi-
nation of programs or activities. 
SEC. 8004. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING ANTI-COMPETITIVE TAX 
POLICY. 
It is the sense of the Senate that Federal funds should not 
be provided to any organization or entity that advocates against 
a United States tax policy that is internationally competitive. 
SEC. 8005. STUDY OF THE PROVISION OF ONLINE DEGREE PROGRAMS. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 90 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Education shall enter into 
an arrangement with the National Academy of Sciences to conduct 
a study and provide a report to the Secretary, the Secretary of 
Commerce, and Congress. The study shall consider the mechanisms 
and supports needed for an institution of higher education (as 
defined in section 7001) or nonprofit organization to develop and 
maintain a program to provide free access to online educational 
content as part of a degree program, especially in science, tech-
nology, engineering, mathematics, or foreign languages, without 
using Federal funds, including funds provided under title IV of 
the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070 et seq.) The 
study shall consider whether such a program could be developed