H. R. 7776—1048 
Subtitle B—Science, Space, and 
Technology Matters 
SEC. 5911. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TEST BEDS 
AND SPECIALIZED FACILITIES. 
Section 34 of the National Institute of Standards and Tech-
nology Act (15 U.S.C. 278s) is amended— 
(1) by redesignating subsections (f) through (l) as sub-
sections (g) through (m), respectively; and 
(2) by inserting after subsection (e) the following: 
‘‘(f) 
AUTHORITY
TO
AWARD
FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE
FOR 
CONSTRUCTION OF TEST BEDS AND SPECIALIZED FACILITIES.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may, acting through the 
Director, award financial assistance for the construction of test 
beds and specialized facilities by Manufacturing USA institutes 
established or supported under subsection (e) as the Secretary 
considers appropriate to carry out the purposes of the Program. 
‘‘(2) 
REQUIREMENTS.—The 
Secretary 
shall 
exercise 
authority under paragraph (1) in a manner and with require-
ments consistent with paragraphs (3) through (8) of subsection 
(e). 
‘‘(3) PRIORITY.—The Secretary shall establish preferences 
in selection criteria for proposals for financial assistance under 
this subsection from Manufacturing USA institutes that 
integrate as active members one or more covered entities as 
described in section 10262 of the Research and Development, 
Competition, and Innovation Act (Public Law 117–167).’’. 
SEC. 5912. REPORTS ON ARCTIC RESEARCH, BUDGET, AND SPENDING. 
(a) CROSSCUT REPORT ON ARCTIC RESEARCH PROGRAMS.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of 
Science and Technology Policy, in coordination with the Director 
of the Office of Management and Budget, shall submit a 
detailed report to Congress regarding all existing Federal pro-
grams relating to Arctic research and research-related activi-
ties, including observation, modeling, monitoring, and pre-
diction, and research infrastructure. The report shall include— 
(A) the goals of each such program; 
(B) the funding levels for each such program for each 
of the 5 immediately preceding fiscal years; 
(C) the anticipated funding levels for each such pro-
gram for each of the 5 following fiscal years; and 
(D) the total funding appropriated for the current fiscal 
year for such programs. 
(2) DISTRIBUTION.—Not later than 30 days after submitting 
the report to Congress pursuant to subsection (a), the Director 
of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall make a 
report available on a public website. 
(b) ANNUAL AGENCY BUDGET AND SPENDING REPORT.— 
(1) ANNUAL AGENCY BUDGETS.—Each agency represented 
on the Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee shall 
each include in their agency’s annual budget request to Con-
gress a description of their agency’s projected Arctic research 
activities and associated budget for the fiscal year covered 
by the budget request.
H. R. 7776—1049 
(2) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Beginning with fiscal year 2025 
and annually thereafter until fiscal year 2034, not later than 
60 days after the President’s budget request for such fiscal 
year is submitted to Congress, the Office of Science and Tech-
nology Policy shall submit an annual report to Congress 
summarizing each agency’s budget request related to Arctic 
research activities per the information submitted in accordance 
with paragraph (1). 
SEC. 5913. NATIONAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR 
DISTRIBUTED LEDGER TECHNOLOGY. 
(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
(1) DIRECTOR.—Except as otherwise expressly provided, the 
term ‘‘Director’’ means the Director of the Office of Science 
and Technology Policy. 
(2) DISTRIBUTED LEDGER.—The term ‘‘distributed ledger’’ 
means a ledger that— 
(A) is shared across a set of distributed nodes, which 
are devices or processes, that participate in a network 
and store a complete or partial replica of the ledger; 
(B) is synchronized between the nodes; 
(C) has data appended to it by following the ledger’s 
specified consensus mechanism; 
(D) may be accessible to anyone (public) or restricted 
to a subset of participants (private); and 
(E) may require participants to have authorization to 
perform certain actions (engaging) or require no authoriza-
tion (permissionless). 
(3) DISTRIBUTED LEDGER TECHNOLOGY.—The term ‘‘distrib-
uted ledger technology’’ means technology that enables the 
operation and use of distributed ledgers. 
(4) INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.—The term ‘‘institu-
tion of higher education’’ has the meaning given the term 
in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
1001). 
(5) RELEVANT CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.—The term ‘‘rel-
evant congressional committees’’ means— 
(A) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation of the Senate; and 
(B) the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 
of the House of Representatives. 
(6) SMART CONTRACT.—The term ‘‘smart contract’’ means 
a computer program stored in a distributed ledger system that 
is executed when certain predefined conditions are satisfied 
and wherein the outcome of any execution of the program 
may be recorded on the distributed ledger. 
(b) NATIONAL DISTRIBUTED LEDGER TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH 
AND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—The Director, or a designee of the 
Director, shall, in coordination with the National Science and 
Technology Council, and the heads of such other relevant Fed-
eral agencies and entities as the Director considers appropriate, 
which may include the National Academies, and in consultation 
with such nongovernmental entities as the Director considers 
appropriate, develop a national strategy for the research and 
development of distributed ledger technologies and their 
applications, including applications of public and permissionless
H. R. 7776—1050 
distributed ledgers. In developing the national strategy, the 
Director shall consider the following: 
(A) Current efforts and coordination by Federal agen-
cies to invest in the research and development of distrib-
uted ledger technologies and their applications, including 
through programs like the Small Business Innovation 
Research program, the Small Business Technology Transfer 
program, and the National Science Foundation’s Innovation 
Corps programs. 
(B)(i) The potential benefits and risks of applications 
of distributed ledger technologies across different industry 
sectors, including their potential to— 
(I) lower transactions costs and facilitate new types 
of commercial transactions; 
(II) protect privacy and increase individuals’ data 
sovereignty; 
(III) reduce friction to the interoperability of digital 
systems; 
(IV) increase the accessibility, auditability, secu-
rity, efficiency, and transparency of digital services; 
(V) increase market competition in the provision 
of digital services; 
(VI) enable dynamic contracting and contract 
execution through smart contracts; 
(VII) enable participants to collaborate in trustless 
and disintermediated environments; 
(VIII) enable the operations and governance of 
distributed organizations; 
(IX) create new ownership models for digital items; 
and 
(X) increase participation of populations histori-
cally underrepresented in the technology, business, and 
financial sectors. 
(ii) In consideration of the potential risks of applica-
tions of distributed ledger technologies under clause (i), 
the Director shall take into account, where applicable— 
(I) additional risks that may emerge from distrib-
uted ledger technologies, as identified in reports sub-
mitted to the President pursuant to Executive Order 
14067, that may be addressed by research and develop-
ment; 
(II) software vulnerabilities in distributed ledger 
technologies and smart contracts; 
(III) limited consumer literacy on engaging with 
applications of distributed ledger technologies in a 
secure way; 
(IV) the use of distributed ledger technologies in 
illicit finance and their use in combating illicit finance; 
(V) manipulative, deceptive, and fraudulent prac-
tices that harm consumers engaging with applications 
of distributed ledger technologies; 
(VI) the implications of different consensus mecha-
nisms for digital ledgers and governance and account-
ability mechanisms for applications of distributed 
ledger technologies, which may include decentralized 
networks;
H. R. 7776—1051 
(VII) foreign activities in the development and 
deployment of distributed ledger technologies and their 
associated tools and infrastructure; and 
(VIII) environmental, sustainability, and economic 
impacts of the computational resources required for 
distributed ledger technologies. 
(C) Potential uses for distributed ledger technologies 
that could improve the operations and delivery of services 
by Federal agencies, taking into account the potential of 
digital ledger technologies to— 
(i) improve the efficiency and effectiveness of pri-
vacy-preserving data sharing among Federal agencies 
and with State, local, territorial, and Tribal govern-
ments; 
(ii) 
promote 
government 
transparency 
by 
improving data sharing with the public; 
(iii) introduce or mitigate risks that may threaten 
individuals’ rights or broad access to Federal services; 
(iv) 
automate 
and 
modernize 
processes 
for 
assessing and ensuring regulatory compliance; and 
(v) facilitate broad access to financial services for 
underserved and underbanked populations. 
(D) Ways to support public and private sector dialogue 
on areas of research that could enhance the efficiency, 
scalability, interoperability, security, and privacy of 
applications using distributed ledger technologies. 
(E) The need for increased coordination of the public 
and private sectors on the development of voluntary stand-
ards in order to promote research and development, 
including standards regarding security, smart contracts, 
cryptographic protocols, virtual routing and forwarding, 
interoperability, zero-knowledge proofs, and privacy, for 
distributed ledger technologies and their applications. 
(F) Applications of distributed ledger technologies that 
could positively benefit society but that receive relatively 
little private sector investment. 
(G) The United States position in global leadership 
and competitiveness across research, development, and 
deployment of distributed ledger technologies. 
(2) CONSULTATION.— 
(A) IN GENERAL.—In carrying out the Director’s duties 
under this subsection, the Director shall consult with the 
following: 
(i) Private industry. 
(ii) Institutions of higher education, including 
minority-serving institutions. 
(iii) Nonprofit organizations, including foundations 
dedicated to supporting distributed ledger technologies 
and their applications. 
(iv) State governments. 
(v) Such other persons as the Director considers 
appropriate. 
(B) REPRESENTATION.—The Director shall ensure con-
sultations with the following: 
(i) Rural and urban stakeholders from across the 
Nation. 
(ii) Small, medium, and large businesses.
H. R. 7776—1052 
(iii) Subject matter experts representing multiple 
industrial sectors. 
(iv) A demographically diverse set of stakeholders. 
(3) COORDINATION.—In carrying out this subsection, the 
Director shall, for purposes of avoiding duplication of activities, 
consult, cooperate, and coordinate with the programs and poli-
cies of other relevant Federal agencies, including the inter-
agency process outlined in section 3 of Executive Order 14067 
(87 Fed. Reg. 14143; relating ensuring responsible development 
of digital assets). 
(4) NATIONAL STRATEGY.—Not later than 1 year after the 
date of enactment of this Act, the Director shall submit to 
the relevant congressional committees and the President a 
national strategy that includes the following: 
(A) Priorities for the research and development of 
distributed ledger technologies and their applications. 
(B) Plans to support public and private sector invest-
ment and partnerships in research and technology develop-
ment for societally beneficial applications of distributed 
ledger technologies. 
(C) Plans to mitigate the risks of distributed ledger 
technologies and their applications. 
(D) An identification of additional resources, adminis-
trative action, or legislative action recommended to assist 
with the implementation of such strategy. 
(5) RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FUNDING.—The Director 
shall, as the Director considers necessary, consult with the 
Director of the Office of Management and Budget and with 
the heads of such other elements of the Executive Office of 
the President as the Director considers appropriate, to ensure 
that the recommendations and priorities with respect to 
research and development funding, as expressed in the national 
strategy developed under this subsection, are incorporated in 
the development of annual budget requests for Federal research 
agencies. 
(c) DISTRIBUTED LEDGER TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to the availability of appropria-
tions, the Director of the National Science Foundation shall 
make awards, on a competitive basis, to institutions of higher 
education, including minority-serving institutions, or nonprofit 
organizations (or consortia of such institutions or organizations) 
to support research, including interdisciplinary research, on 
distributed ledger technologies, their applications, and other 
issues that impact or are caused by distributed ledger tech-
nologies, which may include research on— 
(A) the implications on trust, transparency, privacy, 
accessibility, accountability, and energy consumption of dif-
ferent consensus mechanisms and hardware choices, and 
approaches for addressing these implications; 
(B) approaches for improving the security, privacy, 
resiliency, interoperability, performance, and scalability of 
distributed ledger technologies and their applications, 
which may include decentralized networks; 
(C) 
approaches 
for 
identifying 
and 
addressing 
vulnerabilities and improving the performance and expres-
sive power of smart contracts;
H. R. 7776—1053 
(D) the implications of quantum computing on applica-
tions of distributed ledger technologies, including long-term 
protection of sensitive information (such as medical or dig-
ital property), and techniques to address them; 
(E) game theory, mechanism design, and economics 
underpinning and facilitating the operations and govern-
ance of decentralized networks enabled by distributed 
ledger technologies; 
(F) the social behaviors of participants in decentralized 
networks enabled by distributed ledger technologies; 
(G) human-centric design approaches to make distrib-
uted ledger technologies and their applications more usable 
and accessible; 
(H) use cases for distributed ledger technologies across 
various industry sectors and government, including applica-
tions pertaining to— 
(i) digital identity, including trusted identity and 
identity management; 
(ii) digital property rights; 
(iii) delivery of public services; 
(iv) supply chain transparency; 
(v) medical information management; 
(vi) inclusive financial services; 
(vii) community governance; 
(viii) charitable giving; 
(ix) public goods funding; 
(x) digital credentials; 
(xi) regulatory compliance; 
(xii) infrastructure resilience, including against 
natural disasters; and 
(xiii) peer-to-peer transactions; and 
(I) the social, behavioral, and economic implications 
associated with the growth of applications of distributed 
ledger technologies, including decentralization in business, 
financial, and economic systems. 
(2) ACCELERATING
INNOVATION.—The Director of the 
National Science Foundation shall consider continuing to sup-
port startups that are in need of funding, would develop in 
and contribute to the economy of the United States, leverage 
distributed ledger technologies, have the potential to positively 
benefit society, and have the potential for commercial viability, 
through programs like the Small Business Innovation Research 
program, the Small Business Technology Transfer program, 
and, as appropriate, other programs that promote broad and 
diverse participation. 
(3) CONSIDERATION
OF
NATIONAL
DISTRIBUTED
LEDGER 
TECHNOLOGY
RESEARCH
AND
DEVELOPMENT
STRATEGY.—In 
making awards under paragraph (1), the Director of the 
National Science Foundation shall take into account the 
national strategy, as described in subsection (b)(4). 
(4) FUNDAMENTAL RESEARCH.—The Director of the National 
Science Foundation shall consider continuing to make awards 
supporting fundamental research in areas related to distributed 
ledger technologies and their applications, such as applied 
cryptography and distributed systems. 
(d) DISTRIBUTED
LEDGER
TECHNOLOGY
APPLIED
RESEARCH 
PROJECT.—
H. R. 7776—1054 
(1) APPLIED RESEARCH PROJECT.—Subject to the availability 
of appropriations, the Director of the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology, may carry out an applied research 
project to study and demonstrate the potential benefits and 
unique capabilities of distributed ledger technologies. 
(2) ACTIVITIES.—In carrying out the applied research 
project, the Director of the National Institute of Standards 
and Technology shall— 
(A) identify potential applications of distributed ledger 
technologies, including those that could benefit activities 
at the Department of Commerce or at other Federal agen-
cies, considering applications that could— 
(i) improve the privacy and interoperability of dig-
ital identity and access management solutions; 
(ii) increase the integrity and transparency of 
supply chains through the secure and limited sharing 
of relevant supplier information; 
(iii) facilitate broader participation in distributed 
ledger technologies of populations historically under-
represented in technology, business, and financial sec-
tors; or 
(iv) be of benefit to the public or private sectors, 
as determined by the Director in consultation with 
relevant stakeholders; 
(B) solicit and provide the opportunity for public com-
ment relevant to potential projects; 
(C) consider, in the selection of a project, whether 
the project addresses a pressing need not already addressed 
by another organization or Federal agency; 
(D) establish plans to mitigate potential risks, 
including those outlined in subsection (b)(1)(B)(ii), if 
applicable, of potential projects; 
(E) produce an example solution leveraging distributed 
ledger technologies for 1 of the applications identified in 
subparagraph (A); 
(F) hold a competitive process to select private sector 
partners, if they are engaged, to support the implementa-
tion of the example solution; 
(G) consider hosting the project at the National Cyber-
security Center of Excellence; and 
(H) ensure that cybersecurity best practices consistent 
with the Cybersecurity Frame work of the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology are demonstrated 
in the project. 
(3) BRIEFINGS TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 1 year after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology shall offer a briefing 
to the relevant congressional committees on the progress and 
current findings from the project under this subsection. 
(4) PUBLIC REPORT.—Not later than 12 months after the 
completion of the project under this subsection, the Director 
of the National Institute of Standards and Technology shall 
make public a report on the results and findings from the 
project. 
SEC. 5914. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS. 
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 is amended—
H. R. 7776—1055 
(1) in section 952(a)(2)(A) (42 U.S.C. 16272(a)(2)(A)), by 
striking ‘‘shall evaluate the technical and economic feasibility 
of the establishment of’’ and inserting ‘‘shall evaluate the tech-
nical and economic feasibility of establishing and, if feasible, 
is authorized to establish’’; and 
(2) in section 954(a)(5) (42 U.S.C. 16274(a)(5)), by— 
(A) redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph 
(F); and 
(B) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following: 
‘‘(E) FUEL SERVICES.—The Research Reactor Infrastruc-
ture subprogram within the Radiological Facilities Manage-
ment program of the Department, as authorized by para-
graph (6), shall be expanded to provide fuel services to 
research reactors established by this paragraph.’’. 
Subtitle C—FedRamp Authorization Act 
SEC. 5921. FEDRAMP AUTHORIZATION ACT. 
(a) SHORT TITLE.—This section may be cited as the ‘‘FedRAMP 
Authorization Act’’. 
(b) AMENDMENT.—Chapter 36 of title 44, United States Code, 
is amended by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘§ 3607. Definitions 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided under subsection (b), 
the definitions under sections 3502 and 3552 apply to this section 
through section 3616. 
‘‘(b) ADDITIONAL DEFINITIONS.—In this section through section 
3616: 
‘‘(1) ADMINISTRATOR.—The term ‘Administrator’ means the 
Administrator of General Services. 
‘‘(2) APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.—The term 
‘appropriate congressional committees’ means the Committee 
on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate 
and the Committee on Oversight and Reform of the House 
of Representatives. 
‘‘(3) AUTHORIZATION TO OPERATE; FEDERAL INFORMATION.— 
The terms ‘authorization to operate’ and ‘Federal information’ 
have the meaning given those term in Circular A–130 of the 
Office of Management and Budget entitled ‘Managing Informa-
tion as a Strategic Resource’, or any successor document. 
‘‘(4) CLOUD COMPUTING.—The term ‘cloud computing’ has 
the meaning given the term in Special Publication 800–145 
of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, or any 
successor document. 
‘‘(5) CLOUD SERVICE PROVIDER.—The term ‘cloud service 
provider’ means an entity offering cloud computing products 
or services to agencies. 
‘‘(6) FEDRAMP.—The term ‘FedRAMP’ means the Federal 
Risk and Authorization Management Program established 
under section 3608. 
‘‘(7) FEDRAMP 
AUTHORIZATION.—The term ‘FedRAMP 
authorization’ means a certification that a cloud computing 
product or service has— 
‘‘(A) completed a FedRAMP authorization process, as 
determined by the Administrator; or
H. R. 7776—1056 
‘‘(B) received a FedRAMP provisional authorization to 
operate, as determined by the FedRAMP Board. 
‘‘(8) 
FEDRAMP
AUTHORIZATION
PACKAGE.—The 
term 
‘FedRAMP authorization package’ means the essential informa-
tion that can be used by an agency to determine whether 
to authorize the operation of an information system or the 
use of a designated set of common controls for all cloud com-
puting products and services authorized by FedRAMP. 
‘‘(9) FEDRAMP BOARD.—The term ‘FedRAMP Board’ means 
the board established under section 3610. 
‘‘(10) INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT SERVICE.—The term ‘inde-
pendent assessment service’ means a third-party organization 
accredited by the Administrator to undertake conformity assess-
ments of cloud service providers and the products or services 
of cloud service providers. 
‘‘(11) SECRETARY.—The term ‘Secretary’ means the Sec-
retary of Homeland Security. 
‘‘§ 3608. Federal Risk and Authorization Management Pro-
gram 
‘‘There is established within the General Services Administra-
tion the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program. 
The Administrator, subject to section 3614, shall establish a Govern-
ment-wide program that provides a standardized, reusable approach 
to security assessment and authorization for cloud computing prod-
ucts and services that process unclassified information used by 
agencies. 
‘‘§ 3609. Roles and responsibilities of the General Services 
Administration 
‘‘(a) ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.—The Administrator shall— 
‘‘(1) in consultation with the Secretary, develop, coordinate, 
and implement a process to support agency review, reuse, and 
standardization, where appropriate, of security assessments of 
cloud computing products and services, including, as appro-
priate, oversight of continuous monitoring of cloud computing 
products and services, pursuant to guidance issued by the 
Director pursuant to section 3614; 
‘‘(2) establish processes and identify criteria consistent with 
guidance issued by the Director under section 3614 to make 
a cloud computing product or service eligible for a FedRAMP 
authorization and validate whether a cloud computing product 
or service has a FedRAMP authorization; 
‘‘(3) develop and publish templates, best practices, technical 
assistance, and other materials to support the authorization 
of cloud computing products and services and increase the 
speed, effectiveness, and transparency of the authorization 
process, consistent with standards and guidelines established 
by the Director of the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology and relevant statutes; 
‘‘(4) establish and update guidance on the boundaries of 
FedRAMP authorization packages to enhance the security and 
protection of Federal information and promote transparency 
for agencies and users as to which services are included in 
the scope of a FedRAMP authorization;