H. Rept. 111-478 - 111th Congress (2009-2010)
May 07, 2010, As Reported by the Science and Technology Committee

Report text available as:

Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this legislative text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.




House Report 111-478 - AMERICA COMPETES REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2010




[House Report 111-478]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]


111th Congress                                            Rept. 111-478
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                      Part 1

======================================================================


              AMERICA COMPETES REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2010

                               ----------                              

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                         COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE 
                             AND TECHNOLOGY

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                   on

                               H.R. 5116

                             together with

                    ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS


      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>


                  May 7, 2010.--Ordered to be printed




              AMERICA COMPETES REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2010







111th Congress                                                   Report
 2d Session             HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                111-478
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     


              AMERICA COMPETES REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2010

                               __________

                              R E P O R T

                                 of the

                         COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE 
                             AND TECHNOLOGY

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                                   on

                                H.R. 5116

                             together with

                    ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>


                  May 7, 2010.--Ordered to be printed




                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
   I. Bill...........................................................65
  II. Purpose of the Bill............................................65
 III. Background and Need for the Legislation........................65
  IV. Hearing Summary................................................72
   V. Committee Actions..............................................81
  VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill, as Reported...........90
 VII. Section-by-Section Analysis, as Reported.......................91
VIII. Committee Views...............................................108
  IX. Cost Estimate.................................................129
   X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate.....................129
  XI. Compliance with Public Law 104-4..............................134
 XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations..............134
XIII. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives.........134
 XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement............................135
  XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement..........................135
 XVI. Congressional Accountability Act..............................135
XVII. Earmark Identification........................................135
XVIII.Statement on Preemption of State, Local, or Tribal Law........135

 XIX. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported.........135
  XX. Committee Recommendations.....................................203
 XXI. Exchange of Committee Correspondence..........................204
XXII. Additional Views..............................................207
XXIII.Proceedings of the Subcommittee Markups.......................215

      a. Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.....................241
      b. Subcommittee on Research and Science Education.............343
      c. Subcommittee on Technology and Innovation..................448
XXIV. Proceedings of the Full Committee Markup......................511



111th Congress                                            Rept. 111-478
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                      Part 1

======================================================================



 
              AMERICA COMPETES REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2010

                                _______
                                

                  May 7, 2010.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Gordon of Tennessee, from the Committee on Science and Technology, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                    ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 5116]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on Science and Technology, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 5116) to invest in innovation through research 
and development, to improve the competitiveness of the United 
States, and for other purposes, having considered the same, 
reports favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that 
the bill as amended do pass.

  The amendment is as follows:
  Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

  (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``America COMPETES 
Reauthorization Act of 2010''.
  (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is as 
follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

                 TITLE I--SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY

       Subtitle A--National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments

Sec. 101. Short title.
Sec. 102. National nanotechnology program amendments.
Sec. 103. Societal dimensions of nanotechnology.
Sec. 104. Technology transfer.
Sec. 105. Research in areas of national importance.
Sec. 106. Nanomanufacturing research.
Sec. 107. Definitions.

    Subtitle B--Networking and Information Technology Research and 
                              Development

Sec. 111. Short title.
Sec. 112. Program planning and coordination.
Sec. 113. Large-scale research in areas of national importance.
Sec. 114. Cyber-physical systems and information management.
Sec. 115. National Coordination Office.
Sec. 116. Improving networking and information technology education.
Sec. 117. Conforming and technical amendments.

                   Subtitle C--Other OSTP Provisions

Sec. 121. Federal scientific collections.
Sec. 122. Coordination of manufacturing research and development.
Sec. 123. Interagency public access committee.
Sec. 124. Fulfilling the potential of women in academic science and 
engineering.

                 TITLE II--NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Sec. 201. Short title.

                     Subtitle A--General Provisions

Sec. 211. Definitions.
Sec. 212. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 213. National Science Board administrative amendments.
Sec. 214. Broader impacts review criterion.
Sec. 215. National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics.
Sec. 216. Collection of data on demographics of faculty.

                  Subtitle B--Research and Innovation

Sec. 221. Support for potentially transformative research.
Sec. 222. Facilitating interdisciplinary collaborations for national 
needs.
Sec. 223. National Science Foundation manufacturing research and 
education.
Sec. 224. Strengthening institutional research partnerships.
Sec. 225. National Science Board report on mid-scale instrumentation.
Sec. 226. Sense of Congress on overall support for research 
infrastructure at the Foundation.
Sec. 227. Partnerships for innovation.
Sec. 228. Prize awards.

           Subtitle C--STEM Education and Workforce Training

Sec. 241. Graduate student support.
Sec. 242. Postdoctoral fellowship in STEM education research.
Sec. 243. Robert Noyce teacher scholarship program.
Sec. 244. Institutions serving persons with disabilities.
Sec. 245. Institutional integration.
Sec. 246. Postdoctoral research fellowships.
Sec. 247. Broadening participation training and outreach.
Sec. 248. Transforming undergraduate education in STEM.
Sec. 249. 21st century graduate education.
Sec. 250. Undergraduate broadening participation program.
Sec. 251. Grand challenges in education research.
Sec. 252. Research experiences for undergraduates.
Sec. 253. Laboratory science pilot program.
Sec. 254. STEM industry internship programs.
Sec. 255. Tribal colleges and universities program.

                       TITLE III--STEM EDUCATION

Sec. 301. Coordination of Federal STEM education.
Sec. 302. Advisory committee on STEM education.
Sec. 303. STEM education at the Department of Energy.
Sec. 304. Green energy education.

        TITLE IV--NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY

Sec. 401. Short title.
Sec. 402. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 403. Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology.
Sec. 404. Reorganization of NIST laboratories.
Sec. 405. Federal Government standards and conformity assessment 
coordination.
Sec. 406. Manufacturing extension partnership.
Sec. 407. Bioscience research program.
Sec. 408. Emergency communication and tracking technologies research 
initiative.
Sec. 409. TIP Advisory Board.
Sec. 410. Underrepresented minorities.
Sec. 411. Cyber security standards and guidelines.
Sec. 412. Definitions.

                          TITLE V--INNOVATION

Sec. 501. Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship.
Sec. 502. Federal loan guarantees for innovative technologies in 
manufacturing.
Sec. 503. Regional innovation program.

                     TITLE VI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

                     Subtitle A--Office of Science

Sec. 601. Short title.
Sec. 602. Definitions.
Sec. 603. Mission of the Office of Science.
Sec. 604. Basic Energy Sciences Program.
Sec. 605. Biological and Environmental Research Program.
Sec. 606. Advanced Scientific Computing Research Program.
Sec. 607. Fusion energy research program.
Sec. 608. High Energy Physics Program.
Sec. 609. Nuclear Physics Program.
Sec. 610. Science Laboratories Infrastructure Program.
Sec. 611. Authorization of appropriations.

          Subtitle B--Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy

Sec. 621. Short title.
Sec. 622. ARPA-E amendments.

                   Subtitle C--Energy Innovation Hubs

Sec. 631. Short title.
Sec. 632. Energy Innovation Hubs.

         Subtitle D--Cooperative Research and Development Fund

Sec. 641. Short title.
Sec. 642. Cooperative research and development fund.

                        TITLE VII--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 701. Sense of Congress.
Sec. 702. Persons with disabilities.
Sec. 703. Veterans and service members.

                 TITLE I--SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY

       Subtitle A--National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments

SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.

  This subtitle may be cited as the ``National Nanotechnology 
Initiative Amendments Act of 2010''.

SEC. 102. NATIONAL NANOTECHNOLOGY PROGRAM AMENDMENTS.

  The 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (15 
U.S.C. 7501 et seq.) is amended--
          (1) by striking section 2(c)(4) and inserting the following 
        new paragraph:
          ``(4) develop, within 12 months after the date of enactment 
        of the National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of 
        2010, and update every 3 years thereafter, a strategic plan to 
        guide the activities described under subsection (b) that 
        specifies near-term and long-term objectives for the Program, 
        the anticipated time frame for achieving the near-term 
        objectives, and the metrics to be used for assessing progress 
        toward the objectives, and that describes--
                  ``(A) how the Program will move results out of the 
                laboratory and into applications for the benefit of 
                society, including through cooperation and 
                collaborations with nanotechnology research, 
                development, and technology transition initiatives 
                supported by the States;
                  ``(B) how the Program will encourage and support 
                interdisciplinary research and development in 
                nanotechnology; and
                  ``(C) proposed research in areas of national 
                importance in accordance with the requirements of 
                section 105 of the National Nanotechnology Initiative 
                Amendments Act of 2010;'';
          (2) in section 2--
                  (A) in subsection (d)--
                          (i) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through 
                        (5) as paragraphs (2) through (6), 
                        respectively; and
                          (ii) by inserting the following new paragraph 
                        before paragraph (2), as so redesignated by 
                        clause (i) of this subparagraph:
          ``(1) the Program budget, for the previous fiscal year, for 
        each agency that participates in the Program, including a 
        breakout of spending for the development and acquisition of 
        research facilities and instrumentation, for each program 
        component area, and for all activities pursuant to subsection 
        (b)(10);''; and
                  (B) by inserting at the end the following new 
                subsection:
  ``(e) Standards Setting.--The agencies participating in the Program 
shall support the activities of committees involved in the development 
of standards for nanotechnology and may reimburse the travel costs of 
scientists and engineers who participate in activities of such 
committees.'';
          (3) by striking section 3(b) and inserting the following new 
        subsection:
  ``(b) Funding.--(1) The operation of the National Nanotechnology 
Coordination Office shall be supported by funds from each agency 
participating in the Program. The portion of such Office's total budget 
provided by each agency for each fiscal year shall be in the same 
proportion as the agency's share of the total budget for the Program 
for the previous fiscal year, as specified in the report required under 
section 2(d)(1).
  ``(2) The annual report under section 2(d) shall include--
          ``(A) a description of the funding required by the National 
        Nanotechnology Coordination Office to perform the functions 
        specified under subsection (a) for the next fiscal year by 
        category of activity, including the funding required to carry 
        out the requirements of section 2(b)(10)(D), subsection (d) of 
        this section, and section 5;
          ``(B) a description of the funding required by such Office to 
        perform the functions specified under subsection (a) for the 
        current fiscal year by category of activity, including the 
        funding required to carry out the requirements of subsection 
        (d); and
          ``(C) the amount of funding provided for such Office for the 
        current fiscal year by each agency participating in the 
        Program.'';
          (4) by inserting at the end of section 3 the following new 
        subsection:
  ``(d) Public Information.--(1) The National Nanotechnology 
Coordination Office shall develop and maintain a database accessible by 
the public of projects funded under the Environmental, Health, and 
Safety, the Education and Societal Dimensions, and the 
Nanomanufacturing program component areas, or any successor program 
component areas, including a description of each project, its source of 
funding by agency, and its funding history. For the Environmental, 
Health, and Safety program component area, or any successor program 
component area, projects shall be grouped by major objective as defined 
by the research plan required under section 103(b) of the National 
Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of 2010. For the Education and 
Societal Dimensions program component area, or any successor program 
component area, the projects shall be grouped in subcategories of--
          ``(A) education in formal settings;
          ``(B) education in informal settings;
          ``(C) public outreach; and
          ``(D) ethical, legal, and other societal issues.
  ``(2) The National Nanotechnology Coordination Office shall develop, 
maintain, and publicize information on nanotechnology facilities 
supported under the Program, and may include information on 
nanotechnology facilities supported by the States, that are accessible 
for use by individuals from academic institutions and from industry. 
The information shall include at a minimum the terms and conditions for 
the use of each facility, a description of the capabilities of the 
instruments and equipment available for use at the facility, and a 
description of the technical support available to assist users of the 
facility.'';
          (5) in section 4(a)--
                  (A) by striking ``or designate'';
                  (B) by inserting ``as a distinct entity'' after 
                ``Advisory Panel''; and
                  (C) by inserting at the end ``The Advisory Panel 
                shall form a subpanel with membership having specific 
                qualifications tailored to enable it to carry out the 
                requirements of subsection (c)(7).'';
          (6) in section 4(b)--
                  (A) by striking ``or designated'' and ``or 
                designating''; and
                  (B) by adding at the end the following: ``At least 
                one member of the Advisory Panel shall be an individual 
                employed by and representing a minority-serving 
                institution.'';
          (7) by amending section 5 to read as follows:

``SEC. 5. TRIENNIAL EXTERNAL REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL NANOTECHNOLOGY 
                    PROGRAM.

  ``(a) In General.--The Director of the National Nanotechnology 
Coordination Office shall enter into an arrangement with the National 
Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a 
triennial review of the Program. The Director shall ensure that the 
arrangement with the National Research Council is concluded in order to 
allow sufficient time for the reporting requirements of subsection (b) 
to be satisfied. Each triennial review shall include an evaluation of 
the--
          ``(1) research priorities and technical content of the 
        Program, including whether the allocation of funding among 
        program component areas, as designated according to section 
        2(c)(2), is appropriate;
          ``(2) effectiveness of the Program's management and 
        coordination across agencies and disciplines, including an 
        assessment of the effectiveness of the National Nanotechnology 
        Coordination Office;
          ``(3) Program's scientific and technological accomplishments 
        and its success in transferring technology to the private 
        sector; and
          ``(4) adequacy of the Program's activities addressing 
        ethical, legal, environmental, and other appropriate societal 
        concerns, including human health concerns.
  ``(b) Evaluation To Be Transmitted to Congress.--The National 
Research Council shall document the results of each triennial review 
carried out in accordance with subsection (a) in a report that includes 
any recommendations for ways to improve the Program's management and 
coordination processes and for changes to the Program's objectives, 
funding priorities, and technical content. Each report shall be 
submitted to the Director of the National Nanotechnology Coordination 
Office, who shall transmit it to the Advisory Panel, the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, and the Committee 
on Science and Technology of the House of Representatives not later 
than September 30 of every third year, with the first report due 
September 30, 2010.
  ``(c) Funding.--Of the amounts provided in accordance with section 
3(b)(1), the following amounts shall be available to carry out this 
section:
          ``(1) $500,000 for fiscal year 2010.
          ``(2) $500,000 for fiscal year 2011.
          ``(3) $500,000 for fiscal year 2012.''; and
          (8) in section 10--
                  (A) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
          ``(2) Nanotechnology.--The term `nanotechnology' means the 
        science and technology that will enable one to understand, 
        measure, manipulate, and manufacture at the nanoscale, aimed at 
        creating materials, devices, and systems with fundamentally new 
        properties or functions.''; and
                  (B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
          ``(7) Nanoscale.--The term `nanoscale' means one or more 
        dimensions of between approximately 1 and 100 nanometers.''.

SEC. 103. SOCIETAL DIMENSIONS OF NANOTECHNOLOGY.

  (a) Coordinator for Societal Dimensions of Nanotechnology.--The 
Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall designate 
an associate director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy as 
the Coordinator for Societal Dimensions of Nanotechnology. The 
Coordinator shall be responsible for oversight of the coordination, 
planning, and budget prioritization of activities required by section 
2(b)(10) of the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development 
Act (15 U.S.C. 7501(b)(10)). The Coordinator shall, with the assistance 
of appropriate senior officials of the agencies funding activities 
within the Environmental, Health, and Safety and the Education and 
Societal Dimensions program component areas of the Program, or any 
successor program component areas, ensure that the requirements of such 
section 2(b)(10) are satisfied. The responsibilities of the Coordinator 
shall include--
          (1) ensuring that a research plan for the environmental, 
        health, and safety research activities required under 
        subsection (b) is developed, updated, and implemented and that 
        the plan is responsive to the recommendations of the subpanel 
        of the Advisory Panel established under section 4(a) of the 
        21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (15 
        U.S.C. 7503(a)), as amended by this subtitle;
          (2) encouraging and monitoring the efforts of the agencies 
        participating in the Program to allocate the level of resources 
        and management attention necessary to ensure that the ethical, 
        legal, environmental, and other appropriate societal concerns 
        related to nanotechnology, including human health concerns, are 
        addressed under the Program, including the implementation of 
        the research plan described in subsection (b); and
          (3) encouraging the agencies required to develop the research 
        plan under subsection (b) to identify, assess, and implement 
        suitable mechanisms for the establishment of public-private 
        partnerships for support of environmental, health, and safety 
        research.
  (b) Research Plan.--
          (1) In general.--The Coordinator for Societal Dimensions of 
        Nanotechnology shall convene and chair a panel comprised of 
        representatives from the agencies funding research activities 
        under the Environmental, Health, and Safety program component 
        area of the Program, or any successor program component area, 
        and from such other agencies as the Coordinator considers 
        necessary to develop, periodically update, and coordinate the 
        implementation of a research plan for this program component 
        area. In developing and updating the plan, the panel convened 
        by the Coordinator shall solicit and be responsive to 
        recommendations and advice from--
                  (A) the subpanel of the Advisory Panel established 
                under section 4(a) of the 21st Century Nanotechnology 
                Research and Development Act (15 U.S.C. 7503(a)), as 
                amended by this subtitle; and
                  (B) the agencies responsible for environmental, 
                health, and safety regulations associated with the 
                production, use, and disposal of nanoscale materials 
                and products.
          (2) Development of standards.--The plan required under 
        paragraph (1) shall include a description of how the Program 
        will help to ensure the development of--
                  (A) standards related to nomenclature associated with 
                engineered nanoscale materials;
                  (B) engineered nanoscale standard reference materials 
                for environmental, health, and safety testing; and
                  (C) standards related to methods and procedures for 
                detecting, measuring, monitoring, sampling, and testing 
                engineered nanoscale materials for environmental, 
                health, and safety impacts.
          (3) Components of plan.--The plan required under paragraph 
        (1) shall, with respect to activities described in paragraphs 
        (1) and (2)--
                  (A) specify near-term research objectives and long-
                term research objectives;
                  (B) specify milestones associated with each near-term 
                objective and the estimated time and resources required 
                to reach each milestone;
                  (C) with respect to subparagraphs (A) and (B), 
                describe the role of each agency carrying out or 
                sponsoring research in order to meet the objectives 
                specified under subparagraph (A) and to achieve the 
                milestones specified under subparagraph (B);
                  (D) specify the funding allocated to each major 
                objective of the plan and the source of funding by 
                agency for the current fiscal year; and
                  (E) estimate the funding required for each major 
                objective of the plan and the source of funding by 
                agency for the following 3 fiscal years.
          (4) Transmittal to congress.--The plan required under 
        paragraph (1) shall be submitted not later than 60 days after 
        the date of enactment of this Act to the Committee on Commerce, 
        Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on 
        Science and Technology of the House of Representatives.
          (5) Updating and appending to report.--The plan required 
        under paragraph (1) shall be updated annually and appended to 
        the report required under section 2(d) of the 21st Century 
        Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (15 U.S.C. 
        7501(d)).
  (c) Nanotechnology Partnerships.--
          (1) Establishment.--As part of the program authorized by 
        section 9 of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act 
        of 2002, the Director of the National Science Foundation shall 
        provide 1 or more grants to establish partnerships as defined 
        by subsection (a)(2) of that section, except that each such 
        partnership shall include 1 or more businesses engaged in the 
        production of nanoscale materials, products, or devices. 
        Partnerships established in accordance with this subsection 
        shall be designated as ``Nanotechnology Education 
        Partnerships''.
          (2) Purpose.--Nanotechnology Education Partnerships shall be 
        designed to recruit and help prepare secondary school students 
        to pursue postsecondary level courses of instruction in 
        nanotechnology. At a minimum, grants shall be used to support--
                  (A) professional development activities to enable 
                secondary school teachers to use curricular materials 
                incorporating nanotechnology and to inform teachers 
                about career possibilities for students in 
                nanotechnology;
                  (B) enrichment programs for students, including 
                access to nanotechnology facilities and equipment at 
                partner institutions, to increase their understanding 
                of nanoscale science and technology and to inform them 
                about career possibilities in nanotechnology as 
                scientists, engineers, and technicians; and
                  (C) identification of appropriate nanotechnology 
                educational materials and incorporation of 
                nanotechnology into the curriculum for secondary school 
                students at one or more organizations participating in 
                a Partnership.
          (3) Selection.--Grants under this subsection shall be awarded 
        in accordance with subsection (b) of such section 9, except 
        that paragraph (3)(B) of that subsection shall not apply.
  (d) Undergraduate Education Programs.--
          (1) Activities supported.--As part of the activities included 
        under the Education and Societal Dimensions program component 
        area, or any successor program component area, the Program 
        shall support efforts to introduce nanoscale science, 
        engineering, and technology into undergraduate science and 
        engineering education through a variety of interdisciplinary 
        approaches. Activities supported may include--
                  (A) development of courses of instruction or modules 
                to existing courses;
                  (B) faculty professional development; and
                  (C) acquisition of equipment and instrumentation 
                suitable for undergraduate education and research in 
                nanotechnology.
          (2) Course, curriculum, and laboratory improvement 
        authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the 
        Director of the National Science Foundation to carry out 
        activities described in paragraph (1) through the Course, 
        Curriculum, and Laboratory Improvement program from amounts 
        authorized under section 7002(c)(2)(B) of the America COMPETES 
        Act, $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.
          (3) Advanced technology education authorization.--There are 
        authorized to be appropriated to the Director of the National 
        Science Foundation to carry out activities described in 
        paragraph (1) through the Advanced Technology Education program 
        from amounts authorized under section 7002(c)(2)(B) of the 
        America COMPETES Act, $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.
  (e) Interagency Working Group.--The National Science and Technology 
Council shall establish under the Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and 
Technology Subcommittee an Education Working Group to coordinate, 
prioritize, and plan the educational activities supported under the 
Program.
  (f) Societal Dimensions in Nanotechnology Education Activities.--
Activities supported under the Education and Societal Dimensions 
program component area, or any successor program component area, that 
involve informal, precollege, or undergraduate nanotechnology education 
shall include education regarding the environmental, health and safety, 
and other societal aspects of nanotechnology.
  (g) Remote Access to Nanotechnology Facilities.--(1) Agencies 
supporting nanotechnology research facilities as part of the Program 
shall require the entities that operate such facilities to allow access 
via the Internet, and support the costs associated with the provision 
of such access, by secondary school students and teachers, to 
instruments and equipment within such facilities for educational 
purposes. The agencies may waive this requirement for cases when 
particular facilities would be inappropriate for educational purposes 
or the costs for providing such access would be prohibitive.
  (2) The agencies identified in paragraph (1) shall require the 
entities that operate such nanotechnology research facilities to 
establish and publish procedures, guidelines, and conditions for the 
submission and approval of applications for the use of the facilities 
for the purpose identified in paragraph (1) and shall authorize 
personnel who operate the facilities to provide necessary technical 
support to students and teachers.

SEC. 104. TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER.

  (a) Prototyping.--
          (1) Access to facilities.--In accordance with section 2(b)(7) 
        of 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (15 
        U.S.C. 7501(b)(7)), the agencies supporting nanotechnology 
        research facilities as part of the Program shall provide access 
        to such facilities to companies for the purpose of assisting 
        the companies in the development of prototypes of nanoscale 
        products, devices, or processes (or products, devices, or 
        processes enabled by nanotechnology) for determining proof of 
        concept. The agencies shall publicize the availability of these 
        facilities and encourage their use by companies as provided for 
        in this section.
          (2) Procedures.--The agencies identified in paragraph (1)--
                  (A) shall establish and publish procedures, 
                guidelines, and conditions for the submission and 
                approval of applications for use of nanotechnology 
                facilities;
                  (B) shall publish descriptions of the capabilities of 
                facilities available for use under this subsection, 
                including the availability of technical support; and
                  (C) may waive recovery, require full recovery, or 
                require partial recovery of the costs associated with 
                use of the facilities for projects under this 
                subsection.
          (3) Selection and criteria.--In cases when less than full 
        cost recovery is required pursuant to paragraph (2)(C), 
        projects provided access to nanotechnology facilities in 
        accordance with this subsection shall be selected through a 
        competitive, merit-based process, and the criteria for the 
        selection of such projects shall include at a minimum--
                  (A) the readiness of the project for technology 
                demonstration;
                  (B) evidence of a commitment by the applicant for 
                further development of the project to full 
                commercialization if the proof of concept is 
                established by the prototype; and
                  (C) evidence of the potential for further funding 
                from private sector sources following the successful 
                demonstration of proof of concept.

        The agencies may give special consideration in selecting 
        projects to applications that are relevant to important 
        national needs or requirements.
  (b) Use of Existing Technology Transfer Programs.--
          (1) Participating agencies.--Each agency participating in the 
        Program shall--
                  (A) encourage the submission of applications for 
                support of nanotechnology related projects to the Small 
                Business Innovation Research Program and the Small 
                Business Technology Transfer Program administered by 
                such agencies; and
                  (B) through the National Nanotechnology Coordination 
                Office and within 6 months after the date of enactment 
                of this Act, submit to the Committee on Commerce, 
                Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the 
                Committee on Science and Technology of the House of 
                Representatives--
                          (i) the plan described in section 2(c)(7) of 
                        the 21st Century Nanotechnology Research and 
                        Development Act (15 U.S.C. 7501(c)(7)); and
                          (ii) a report specifying, if the agency 
                        administers a Small Business Innovation 
                        Research Program and a Small Business 
                        Technology Transfer Program--
                                  (I) the number of proposals received 
                                for nanotechnology related projects 
                                during the current fiscal year and the 
                                previous 2 fiscal years;
                                  (II) the number of such proposals 
                                funded in each year;
                                  (III) the total number of 
                                nanotechnology related projects funded 
                                and the amount of funding provided for 
                                fiscal year 2004 through fiscal year 
                                2008; and
                                  (IV) a description of the projects 
                                identified in accordance with subclause 
                                (III) which received private sector 
                                funding beyond the period of phase II 
                                support.
          (2) National institute of standards and technology.--The 
        Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology 
        in carrying out the requirements of section 28 of the National 
        Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278n) 
        shall--
                  (A) in regard to subsection (d) of that section, 
                encourage the submission of proposals for support of 
                nanotechnology related projects; and
                  (B) in regard to subsection (g) of that section, 
                include a description of how the requirement of 
                subparagraph (A) of this paragraph is being met, the 
                number of proposals for nanotechnology related projects 
                received, the number of such proposals funded, the 
                total number of such projects funded since the 
                beginning of the Technology Innovation Program, and the 
                outcomes of such funded projects in terms of the 
                metrics developed in accordance with such subsection 
                (g).
          (3) TIP advisory board.--The TIP Advisory Board established 
        under section 28(k) of the National Institute of Standards and 
        Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278n(k)), in carrying out its 
        responsibilities under subsection (k)(3), shall provide the 
        Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology 
        with--
                  (A) advice on how to accomplish the requirement of 
                paragraph (2)(A) of this subsection; and
                  (B) an assessment of the adequacy of the allocation 
                of resources for nanotechnology related projects 
                supported under the Technology Innovation Program.
  (c) Industry Liaison Groups.--An objective of the Program shall be to 
establish industry liaison groups for all industry sectors that would 
benefit from applications of nanotechnology. The Nanomanufacturing, 
Industry Liaison, and Innovation Working Group of the National Science 
and Technology Council shall actively pursue establishing such liaison 
groups.
  (d) Coordination With State Initiatives.--Section 2(b)(5) of the 21st 
Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (15 U.S.C. 
7501(b)(5)) is amended to read as follows:
          ``(5) ensuring United States global leadership in the 
        development and application of nanotechnology, including 
        through coordination and leveraging Federal investments with 
        nanotechnology research, development, and technology transition 
        initiatives supported by the States;''.

SEC. 105. RESEARCH IN AREAS OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE.

  (a) In General.--The Program shall include support for nanotechnology 
research and development activities directed toward application areas 
that have the potential for significant contributions to national 
economic competitiveness and for other significant societal benefits. 
The activities supported shall be designed to advance the development 
of research discoveries by demonstrating technical solutions to 
important problems in such areas as nano-electronics, energy 
efficiency, health care, and water remediation and purification. The 
Advisory Panel shall make recommendations to the Program for candidate 
research and development areas for support under this section.
  (b) Characteristics.--
          (1) In general.--Research and development activities under 
        this section shall--
                  (A) include projects selected on the basis of 
                applications for support through a competitive, merit-
                based process;
                  (B) involve collaborations among researchers in 
                academic institutions and industry, and may involve 
                nonprofit research institutions and Federal 
                laboratories, as appropriate;
                  (C) when possible, leverage Federal investments 
                through collaboration with related State initiatives; 
                and
                  (D) include a plan for fostering the transfer of 
                research discoveries and the results of technology 
                demonstration activities to industry for commercial 
                development.
          (2) Procedures.--Determination of the requirements for 
        applications under this subsection, review and selection of 
        applications for support, and subsequent funding of projects 
        shall be carried out by a collaboration of no fewer than 2 
        agencies participating in the Program. In selecting 
        applications for support, the agencies shall give special 
        consideration to projects that include cost sharing from non-
        Federal sources.
          (3) Interdisciplinary research centers.--Research and 
        development activities under this section may be supported 
        through interdisciplinary nanotechnology research centers, as 
        authorized by section 2(b)(4) of the 21st Century 
        Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (15 U.S.C. 
        7501(b)(4)), that are organized to investigate basic research 
        questions and carry out technology demonstration activities in 
        areas such as those identified in subsection (a).
  (c) Report.--Reports required under section 2(d) of the 21st Century 
Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (15 U.S.C. 7501(d)) shall 
include a description of research and development areas supported in 
accordance with this section, including the same budget information as 
is required for program component areas under paragraphs (1) and (2) of 
such section 2(d).

SEC. 106. NANOMANUFACTURING RESEARCH.

  (a) Research Areas.--The Nanomanufacturing program component area, or 
any successor program component area, shall include research on--
          (1) development of instrumentation and tools required for the 
        rapid characterization of nanoscale materials and for 
        monitoring of nanoscale manufacturing processes; and
          (2) approaches and techniques for scaling the synthesis of 
        new nanoscale materials to achieve industrial-level production 
        rates.
  (b) Green Nanotechnology.--Interdisciplinary research centers 
supported under the Program in accordance with section 2(b)(4) of the 
21st Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (15 U.S.C. 
7501(b)(4)) that are focused on nanomanufacturing research and centers 
established under the authority of section 105(b)(3) of this subtitle 
shall include as part of the activities of such centers--
          (1) research on methods and approaches to develop 
        environmentally benign nanoscale products and nanoscale 
        manufacturing processes, taking into consideration relevant 
        findings and results of research supported under the 
        Environmental, Health, and Safety program component area, or 
        any successor program component area;
          (2) fostering the transfer of the results of such research to 
        industry; and
          (3) providing for the education of scientists and engineers 
        through interdisciplinary studies in the principles and 
        techniques for the design and development of environmentally 
        benign nanoscale products and processes.
  (c) Review of Nanomanufacturing Research and Research Facilities.--
          (1) Public meeting.--Not later than 12 months after the date 
        of enactment of this Act, the National Nanotechnology 
        Coordination Office shall sponsor a public meeting, including 
        representation from a wide range of industries engaged in 
        nanoscale manufacturing, to--
                  (A) obtain the views of participants at the meeting 
                on--
                          (i) the relevance and value of the research 
                        being carried out under the Nanomanufacturing 
                        program component area of the Program, or any 
                        successor program component area; and
                          (ii) whether the capabilities of 
                        nanotechnology research facilities supported 
                        under the Program are adequate--
                                  (I) to meet current and near-term 
                                requirements for the fabrication and 
                                characterization of nanoscale devices 
                                and systems; and
                                  (II) to provide access to and use of 
                                instrumentation and equipment at the 
                                facilities, by means of networking 
                                technology, to individuals who are at 
                                locations remote from the facilities; 
                                and
                  (B) receive any recommendations on ways to strengthen 
                the research portfolio supported under the 
                Nanomanufacturing program component area, or any 
                successor program component area, and on improving the 
                capabilities of nanotechnology research facilities 
                supported under the Program.

        Companies participating in industry liaison groups shall be 
        invited to participate in the meeting. The Coordination Office 
        shall prepare a report documenting the findings and 
        recommendations resulting from the meeting.
          (2) Advisory panel review.--The Advisory Panel shall review 
        the Nanomanufacturing program component area of the Program, or 
        any successor program component area, and the capabilities of 
        nanotechnology research facilities supported under the Program 
        to assess--
                  (A) whether the funding for the Nanomanufacturing 
                program component area, or any successor program 
                component area, is adequate and receiving appropriate 
                priority within the overall resources available for the 
                Program;
                  (B) the relevance of the research being supported to 
                the identified needs and requirements of industry;
                  (C) whether the capabilities of nanotechnology 
                research facilities supported under the Program are 
                adequate--
                          (i) to meet current and near-term 
                        requirements for the fabrication and 
                        characterization of nanoscale devices and 
                        systems; and
                          (ii) to provide access to and use of 
                        instrumentation and equipment at the 
                        facilities, by means of networking technology, 
                        to individuals who are at locations remote from 
                        the facilities; and
                  (D) the level of funding that would be needed to 
                support--
                          (i) the acquisition of instrumentation, 
                        equipment, and networking technology sufficient 
                        to provide the capabilities at nanotechnology 
                        research facilities described in subparagraph 
                        (C); and
                          (ii) the operation and maintenance of such 
                        facilities.

        In carrying out its assessment, the Advisory Panel shall take 
        into consideration the findings and recommendations from the 
        report required under paragraph (1).
          (3) Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date of 
        enactment of this Act, the Advisory Panel shall submit to the 
        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 
        Senate and the Committee on Science and Technology of the House 
        of Representatives a report on its assessment required under 
        paragraph (2), along with any recommendations and a copy of the 
        report prepared in accordance with paragraph (1).

SEC. 107. DEFINITIONS.

  In this subtitle, terms that are defined in section 10 of the 21st 
Century Nanotechnology Research and Development Act (15 U.S.C. 7509) 
have the meaning given those terms in that section.

    Subtitle B--Networking and Information Technology Research and 
                              Development

SEC. 111. SHORT TITLE.

  This subtitle may be cited as the ``Networking and Information 
Technology Research and Development Act of 2010''.

SEC. 112. PROGRAM PLANNING AND COORDINATION.

  (a) Periodic Reviews.--Section 101 of the High-Performance Computing 
Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5511) is amended by adding at the end the 
following new subsection:
  ``(d) Periodic Reviews.--The agencies identified in subsection 
(a)(3)(B) shall--
          ``(1) periodically assess the contents and funding levels of 
        the Program Component Areas and restructure the Program when 
        warranted, taking into consideration any relevant 
        recommendations of the advisory committee established under 
        subsection (b); and
          ``(2) ensure that the Program includes large-scale, long-
        term, interdisciplinary research and development activities, 
        including activities described in section 104.''.
  (b) Development of Strategic Plan.--Section 101 of such Act (15 
U.S.C. 5511) is amended further by adding after subsection (d), as 
added by subsection (a) of this section, the following new subsection:
  ``(e) Strategic Plan.--
          ``(1) In General.--The agencies identified in subsection 
        (a)(3)(B), working through the National Science and Technology 
        Council and with the assistance of the National Coordination 
        Office established under section 102, shall develop, within 12 
        months after the date of enactment of the Networking and 
        Information Technology Research and Development Act of 2010, 
        and update every 3 years thereafter, a 5-year strategic plan to 
        guide the activities described under subsection (a)(1).
          ``(2) Contents.--The strategic plan shall specify near-term 
        and long-term objectives for the Program, the anticipated time 
        frame for achieving the near-term objectives, the metrics to be 
        used for assessing progress toward the objectives, and how the 
        Program will--
                  ``(A) foster the transfer of research and development 
                results into new technologies and applications for the 
                benefit of society, including through cooperation and 
                collaborations with networking and information 
                technology research, development, and technology 
                transition initiatives supported by the States;
                  ``(B) encourage and support mechanisms for 
                interdisciplinary research and development in 
                networking and information technology, including 
                through collaborations across agencies, across Program 
                Component Areas, with industry, with Federal 
                laboratories (as defined in section 4 of the Stevenson-
                Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 
                3703)), and with international organizations;
                  ``(C) address long-term challenges of national 
                importance for which solutions require large-scale, 
                long-term, interdisciplinary research and development;
                  ``(D) place emphasis on innovative and high-risk 
                projects having the potential for substantial societal 
                returns on the research investment;
                  ``(E) strengthen all levels of networking and 
                information technology education and training programs 
                to ensure an adequate, well-trained workforce; and
                  ``(F) attract more women and underrepresented 
                minorities to pursue postsecondary degrees in 
                networking and information technology.
  ``(3) National Research Infrastructure.--The strategic plan developed 
in accordance with paragraph (1) shall be accompanied by milestones and 
roadmaps for establishing and maintaining the national research 
infrastructure required to support the Program, including the roadmap 
required by subsection (a)(2)(E).
  ``(4) Recommendations.--The entities involved in developing the 
strategic plan under paragraph (1) shall take into consideration the 
recommendations--
          ``(A) of the advisory committee established under subsection 
        (b); and
          ``(B) of the stakeholders whose input was solicited by the 
        National Coordination Office, as required under section 
        102(b)(3).
  ``(5) Report to Congress.--The Director of the National Coordination 
Office shall transmit the strategic plan required under paragraph (1) 
to the advisory committee, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation of the Senate, and the Committee on Science and 
Technology of the House of Representatives.''.
  (c) Additional Responsibilities of Director.--Section 101(a)(2) of 
such Act (15 U.S.C. 5511(a)(2)) is amended--
          (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (E) and (F) as 
        subparagraphs (F) and (G), respectively; and
          (2) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following new 
        subparagraph:
                  ``(E) encourage and monitor the efforts of the 
                agencies participating in the Program to allocate the 
                level of resources and management attention necessary 
                to ensure that the strategic plan under subsection (e) 
                is developed and executed effectively and that the 
                objectives of the Program are met;''.
  (d) Advisory Committee.--Section 101(b)(1) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 
5511(b)(1)) is amended by inserting after ``an advisory committee on 
high-performance computing,'' the following: ``in which the co-chairs 
shall be members of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and 
Technology and with the remainder of the committee''.
  (e) Report.--Section 101(a)(3) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 5511(a)(3)) is 
amended--
          (1) in subparagraph (C)--
                  (A) by striking ``is submitted,'' and inserting ``is 
                submitted, the levels for the previous fiscal year,''; 
                and
                  (B) by striking ``each Program Component Area;'' and 
                inserting ``each Program Component Area and research 
                area supported in accordance with section 104;'';
          (2) in subparagraph (D)--
                  (A) by striking ``each Program Component Area,'' and 
                inserting ``each Program Component Area and research 
                area supported in accordance with section 104,'';
                  (B) by striking ``is submitted,'' and inserting ``is 
                submitted, the levels for the previous fiscal year,''; 
                and
                  (C) by striking ``and'' after the semicolon;
          (3) by redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (G); 
        and
          (4) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following new 
        subparagraphs:
                  ``(E) include a description of how the objectives for 
                each Program Component Area, and the objectives for 
                activities that involve multiple Program Component 
                Areas, relate to the objectives of the Program 
                identified in the strategic plan required under 
                subsection (e);
                  ``(F) include--
                          ``(i) a description of the funding required 
                        by the National Coordination Office to perform 
                        the functions specified under section 102(b) 
                        for the next fiscal year by category of 
                        activity;
                          ``(ii) a description of the funding required 
                        by such Office to perform the functions 
                        specified under section 102(b) for the current 
                        fiscal year by category of activity; and
                          ``(iii) the amount of funding provided for 
                        such Office for the current fiscal year by each 
                        agency participating in the Program; and''.
  (f) Definition.--Section 4 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 5503) is amended--
          (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through (7) as paragraphs 
        (2) through (8), respectively;
          (2) by inserting before paragraph (2), as so redesignated, 
        the following new paragraph:
          ``(1) `cyber-physical systems' means physical or engineered 
        systems whose networking and information technology functions 
        and physical elements are deeply integrated and are actively 
        connected to the physical world through sensors, actuators, or 
        other means to perform monitoring and control functions;'';
          (3) in paragraph (4), as so redesignated--
                  (A) by striking ``high-performance computing'' and 
                inserting ``networking and information technology''; 
                and
                  (B) by striking ``supercomputer'' and inserting 
                ``high-end computing'';
          (4) in paragraph (6), as so redesignated, by striking 
        ``network referred to as'' and all that follows through the 
        semicolon and inserting ``network, including advanced computer 
        networks of Federal agencies and departments;''; and
          (5) in paragraph (7), as so redesignated, by striking 
        ``National High-Performance Computing Program'' and inserting 
        ``networking and information technology research and 
        development program''.

SEC. 113. LARGE-SCALE RESEARCH IN AREAS OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE.

  Title I of such Act (15 U.S.C. 5511) is amended by adding at the end 
the following new section:

``SEC. 104. LARGE-SCALE RESEARCH IN AREAS OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE.

  ``(a) In General.--The Program shall encourage agencies identified in 
section 101(a)(3)(B) to support large-scale, long-term, 
interdisciplinary research and development activities in networking and 
information technology directed toward application areas that have the 
potential for significant contributions to national economic 
competitiveness and for other significant societal benefits. Such 
activities, ranging from basic research to the demonstration of 
technical solutions, shall be designed to advance the development of 
research discoveries. The advisory committee established under section 
101(b) shall make recommendations to the Program for candidate research 
and development areas for support under this section.
  ``(b) Characteristics.--
          ``(1) In general.--Research and development activities under 
        this section shall--
                  ``(A) include projects selected on the basis of 
                applications for support through a competitive, merit-
                based process;
                  ``(B) involve collaborations among researchers in 
                institutions of higher education and industry, and may 
                involve nonprofit research institutions and Federal 
                laboratories, as appropriate;
                  ``(C) when possible, leverage Federal investments 
                through collaboration with related State initiatives; 
                and
                  ``(D) include a plan for fostering the transfer of 
                research discoveries and the results of technology 
                demonstration activities, including from institutions 
                of higher education and Federal laboratories, to 
                industry for commercial development.
          ``(2) Cost-sharing.--In selecting applications for support, 
        the agencies shall give special consideration to projects that 
        include cost sharing from non-Federal sources.
          ``(3) Agency collaboration.--If 2 or more agencies identified 
        in section 101(a)(3)(B), or other appropriate agencies, are 
        working on large-scale research and development activities in 
        the same area of national importance, then such agencies shall 
        strive to collaborate through joint solicitation and selection 
        of applications for support and subsequent funding of projects.
          ``(4) Interdisciplinary research centers.--Research and 
        development activities under this section may be supported 
        through interdisciplinary research centers that are organized 
        to investigate basic research questions and carry out 
        technology demonstration activities in areas described in 
        subsection (a). Research may be carried out through existing 
        interdisciplinary centers, including those authorized under 
        section 7024(b)(2) of the America COMPETES Act (Public Law 110-
        69; 42 U.S.C. 1862o-10).''.

SEC. 114. CYBER-PHYSICAL SYSTEMS AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT.

  (a) Additional Program Characteristics.--Section 101(a)(1) of such 
Act (15 U.S.C. 5511(a)(1)) is amended--
          (1) in subparagraph (H), by striking ``and'' after the 
        semicolon;
          (2) in subparagraph (I), by striking the period at the end 
        and inserting a semicolon; and
          (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraphs:
                  ``(J) provide for increased understanding of the 
                scientific principles of cyber-physical systems and 
                improve the methods available for the design, 
                development, and operation of cyber-physical systems 
                that are characterized by high reliability, safety, and 
                security; and
                  ``(K) provide for research and development on human-
                computer interactions, visualization, and information 
                management.''.
  (b) Task Force.--Title I of such Act (15 U.S.C. 5511) is amended 
further by adding after section 104, as added by section 113 of this 
Act, the following new section:

``SEC. 105. UNIVERSITY/INDUSTRY TASK FORCE.

  ``(a) Establishment.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
enactment of the Networking and Information Technology Research and 
Development Act of 2010, the Director of the National Coordination 
Office established under section 102 shall convene a task force to 
explore mechanisms for carrying out collaborative research and 
development activities for cyber-physical systems, including the 
related technologies required to enable these systems, through a 
consortium or other appropriate entity with participants from 
institutions of higher education, Federal laboratories, and industry.
  ``(b) Functions.--The task force shall--
          ``(1) develop options for a collaborative model and an 
        organizational structure for such entity under which the joint 
        research and development activities could be planned, managed, 
        and conducted effectively, including mechanisms for the 
        allocation of resources among the participants in such entity 
        for support of such activities;
          ``(2) propose a process for developing a research and 
        development agenda for such entity, including objectives and 
        milestones;
          ``(3) define the roles and responsibilities for the 
        participants from institutions of higher education, Federal 
        laboratories, and industry in such entity;
          ``(4) propose guidelines for assigning intellectual property 
        rights and for the transfer of research results to the private 
        sector; and
          ``(5) make recommendations for how such entity could be 
        funded from Federal, State, and non-governmental sources.
  ``(c) Composition.--In establishing the task force under subsection 
(a), the Director of the National Coordination Office shall appoint an 
equal number of individuals from institutions of higher education and 
from industry with knowledge and expertise in cyber-physical systems, 
of which 2 may be selected from Federal laboratories.
  ``(d) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of 
the Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Act 
of 2010, the Director of the National Coordination Office shall 
transmit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of 
the Senate and the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of 
Representatives a report describing the findings and recommendations of 
the task force.''.

SEC. 115. NATIONAL COORDINATION OFFICE.

  Section 102 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 5512) is amended to read as 
follows:

``SEC. 102. NATIONAL COORDINATION OFFICE.

  ``(a) Establishment.--The Director shall establish a National 
Coordination Office with a Director and full-time staff.
  ``(b) Functions.--The National Coordination Office shall--
          ``(1) provide technical and administrative support to--
                  ``(A) the agencies participating in planning and 
                implementing the Program, including such support as 
                needed in the development of the strategic plan under 
                section 101(e); and
                  ``(B) the advisory committee established under 
                section 101(b);
          ``(2) serve as the primary point of contact on Federal 
        networking and information technology activities for government 
        organizations, academia, industry, professional societies, 
        State computing and networking technology programs, interested 
        citizen groups, and others to exchange technical and 
        programmatic information;
          ``(3) solicit input and recommendations from a wide range of 
        stakeholders during the development of each strategic plan 
        required under section 101(e) through the convening of at least 
        1 workshop with invitees from academia, industry, Federal 
        laboratories, and other relevant organizations and 
        institutions;
          ``(4) conduct public outreach, including the dissemination of 
        findings and recommendations of the advisory committee, as 
        appropriate; and
          ``(5) promote access to and early application of the 
        technologies, innovations, and expertise derived from Program 
        activities to agency missions and systems across the Federal 
        Government and to United States industry.
  ``(c) Source of Funding.--
          ``(1) In general.--The operation of the National Coordination 
        Office shall be supported by funds from each agency 
        participating in the Program.
          ``(2) Specifications.--The portion of the total budget of 
        such Office that is provided by each agency for each fiscal 
        year shall be in the same proportion as each such agency's 
        share of the total budget for the Program for the previous 
        fiscal year, as specified in the report required under section 
        101(a)(3).''.

SEC. 116. IMPROVING NETWORKING AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION.

   Section 201(a) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 5521(a)) is amended--
          (1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (4) as paragraphs 
        (3) through (5), respectively; and
          (2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
        paragraph:
          ``(2) the National Science Foundation shall use its existing 
        programs, in collaboration with other agencies, as appropriate, 
        to improve the teaching and learning of networking and 
        information technology at all levels of education and to 
        increase participation in networking and information technology 
        fields, including by women and underrepresented minorities;''.

SEC. 117. CONFORMING AND TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.

  (a) Section 3.--Section 3 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 5502) is amended--
          (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking 
        ``high-performance computing'' and inserting ``networking and 
        information technology'';
          (2) in paragraph (1), in the matter preceding subparagraph 
        (A), by striking ``high-performance computing'' and inserting 
        ``networking and information technology'';
          (3) in subparagraphs (A) and (F) of paragraph (1), by 
        striking ``high-performance computing'' each place it appears 
        and inserting ``networking and information technology''; and
          (4) in paragraph (2)--
                  (A) by striking ``high-performance computing and'' 
                and inserting ``networking and information technology 
                and''; and
                  (B) by striking ``high-performance computing 
                network'' and inserting ``networking and information 
                technology''.
  (b) Title I.--The heading of title I of such Act (15 U.S.C. 5511) is 
amended by striking ``HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING'' and inserting 
``NETWORKING AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY''.
  (c) Section 101.--Section 101 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 5511) is 
amended--
          (1) in the section heading, by striking ``high-performance 
        computing'' and inserting ``networking and information 
        technology research and development'';
          (2) in subsection (a)--
                  (A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``National 
                High-Performance Computing'' and inserting ``Networking 
                and Information Technology Research and Development'';
                  (B) in paragraph (1) of such subsection--
                          (i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), 
                        by striking ``National High-Performance 
                        Computing Program'' and inserting ``networking 
                        and information technology research and 
                        development program'';
                          (ii) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``high-
                        performance computing, including networking'' 
                        and inserting ``networking and information 
                        technology''; and
                          (iii) in subparagraphs (B), (C), and (G), by 
                        striking ``high-performance'' each place it 
                        appears and inserting ``high-end''; and
                  (C) in paragraph (2) of such subsection--
                          (i) in subparagraphs (A) and (C)--
                                  (I) by striking ``high-performance 
                                computing'' each place it appears and 
                                inserting ``networking and information 
                                technology''; and
                                  (II) by striking ``development, 
                                networking,'' each place it appears and 
                                inserting ``development,''; and
                          (ii) in subparagraphs (F) and (G), as 
                        redesignated by section 112(c)(1) of this Act, 
                        by striking ``high-performance'' each place it 
                        appears and inserting ``high-end'';
          (3) in subsection (b)(1), in the matter preceding 
        subparagraph (A), by striking ``high-performance computing'' 
        both places it appears and inserting ``networking and 
        information technology''; and
          (4) in subsection (c)(1)(A), by striking ``high-performance 
        computing'' and inserting ``networking and information 
        technology''.
  (d) Section 201.--Section 201(a)(1) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 
5521(a)(1)) is amended by striking ``high-performance computing'' and 
all that follows through ``networking;'' and inserting ``networking and 
information research and development;''.
  (e) Section 202.--Section 202(a) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 5522(a)) is 
amended by striking ``high-performance computing'' and inserting 
``networking and information technology''.
  (f) Section 203.--Section 203(a)(1) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 
5523(a)(1)) is amended by striking ``high-performance computing and 
networking'' and inserting ``networking and information technology''.
  (g) Section 204.--Section 204(a)(1) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 
5524(a)(1)) is amended--
          (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``high-performance 
        computing systems and networks'' and inserting ``networking and 
        information technology systems and capabilities''; and
          (2) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``high-performance 
        computing'' and inserting ``networking and information 
        technology''.
  (h) Section 205.--Section 205(a) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 5525(a)) is 
amended by striking ``computational'' and inserting ``networking and 
information technology''.
  (i) Section 206.--Section 206(a) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 5526(a)) is 
amended by striking ``computational research'' and inserting 
``networking and information technology research''.
  (j) Section 208.--Section 208 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 5528) is 
amended--
          (1) in the section heading, by striking ``high-
        performance computing'' and inserting 
        ``networking and information 
        technology''; and
          (2) in subsection (a)--
                  (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``High-performance 
                computing and associated'' and inserting ``Networking 
                and information'';
                  (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``high-performance 
                computing'' and inserting ``networking and information 
                technologies'';
                  (C) in paragraph (4), by striking ``high-performance 
                computers and associated'' and inserting ``networking 
                and information''; and
                  (D) in paragraph (5), by striking ``high-performance 
                computing and associated'' and inserting ``networking 
                and information''.

                   Subtitle C--Other OSTP Provisions

SEC. 121. FEDERAL SCIENTIFIC COLLECTIONS.

  (a) Management of Scientific Collections.--The Office of Science and 
Technology Policy, in consultation with relevant Federal agencies, 
shall ensure the development of formal policies for the management and 
use of Federal scientific collections to improve the quality, 
organization, access, including online access, and long-term 
preservation of such collections for the benefit of the scientific 
enterprise.
  (b) Definition.--For the purposes of this section, the term 
``scientific collection'' means a set of physical specimens, living or 
inanimate, created for the purpose of supporting science and serving as 
a long-term research asset, rather than for their market value as 
collectibles or their historical, artistic, or cultural significance.
  (c) Clearinghouse.--The Office of Science and Technology Policy, in 
consultation with relevant Federal agencies, shall ensure the 
development of an online clearinghouse for information on the contents 
of and access to Federal scientific collections.
  (d) Disposal of Collections.--The policies developed under subsection 
(a) shall--
          (1) require that, before disposing of a scientific 
        collection, a Federal agency shall--
                  (A) conduct a review of the research value of the 
                collection; and
                  (B) consult with researchers who have used the 
                collection, and other potentially interested parties, 
                concerning--
                          (i) the collection's value for research 
                        purposes; and
                          (ii) possible additional educational uses for 
                        the collection; and
          (2) include procedures for Federal agencies to transfer 
        scientific collections they no longer need to researchers at 
        institutions or other entities qualified to manage the 
        collections.
  (e) Cost Projections.--The Office of Science and Technology Policy, 
in consultation with relevant Federal agencies, shall develop a common 
set of methodologies to be used by Federal agencies for the assessment 
and projection of costs associated with the management and preservation 
of their scientific collections.

SEC. 122. COORDINATION OF MANUFACTURING RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.

  (a) Interagency Committee.--The Director of the Office of Science and 
Technology Policy shall establish or designate an interagency committee 
under the National Science and Technology Council with the 
responsibility for planning and coordinating Federal programs and 
activities in manufacturing research and development.
  (b) Responsibilities of Committee.--The interagency committee 
established or designated under subsection (a) shall--
          (1) coordinate the manufacturing research and development 
        programs and activities of the Federal agencies;
          (2) establish goals and priorities for manufacturing research 
        and development that will strengthen United States 
        manufacturing; and
          (3) develop and update every 5 years thereafter a strategic 
        plan to guide Federal programs and activities in support of 
        manufacturing research and development, which shall--
                  (A) specify and prioritize near-term and long-term 
                research and development objectives, the anticipated 
                time frame for achieving the objectives, and the 
                metrics for use in assessing progress toward the 
                objectives;
                  (B) specify the role of each Federal agency in 
                carrying out or sponsoring research and development to 
                meet the objectives of the strategic plan; and
                  (C) describe how the Federal agencies supporting 
                manufacturing research and development will foster the 
                transfer of research and development results into new 
                manufacturing technologies, processes, and products for 
                the benefit of society and the national interest.
  (c) Recommendations.--In the development of the strategic plan 
required under subsection (b)(3), the Director of the Office of Science 
and Technology Policy, working through the interagency committee, shall 
take into consideration the recommendations of a wide range of 
stakeholders, including representatives from diverse manufacturing 
companies, academia, and other relevant organizations and institutions.
  (d) Report to Congress.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of Science and 
Technology Policy shall transmit the strategic plan developed under 
subsection (b)(3) to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation of the Senate, and the Committee on Science and 
Technology of the House of Representatives, and shall transmit 
subsequent updates to those committees when completed.

SEC. 123. INTERAGENCY PUBLIC ACCESS COMMITTEE.

   (a) Establishment.--The Director of the Office of Science and 
Technology Policy shall establish a working group under the National 
Science and Technology Council with the responsibility to coordinate 
Federal science agency research and policies related to the 
dissemination and long-term stewardship of the results of unclassified 
research, including digital data and peer-reviewed scholarly 
publications, supported wholly, or in part, by funding from the Federal 
science agencies.
  (b) Responsibilities.--The working group established under subsection 
(a) shall--
          (1) coordinate the development or designation of uniform 
        standards for research data, the structure of full text and 
        metadata, navigation tools, and other applications to achieve 
        interoperability across Federal science agencies, across 
        science and engineering disciplines, and between research data 
        and scholarly publications, taking into account existing 
        consensus standards, including international standards;
          (2) coordinate Federal science agency programs and activities 
        that support research and education on tools and systems 
        required to ensure preservation and stewardship of all forms of 
        digital research data, including scholarly publications;
          (3) work with international science and technology 
        counterparts to maximize interoperability between United States 
        based unclassified research databases and international 
        databases and repositories;
          (4) solicit input and recommendations from, and collaborate 
        with, non-Federal stakeholders, including universities, 
        nonprofit and for-profit publishers, libraries, federally 
        funded research scientists, and other organizations and 
        institutions with a stake in long term preservation and access 
        to the results of federally funded research; and
          (5) establish priorities for coordinating the development of 
        any Federal science agency policies related to public access to 
        the results of federally funded research to maximize uniformity 
        of such policies with respect to their benefit to, and 
        potential economic or other impact on, the science and 
        engineering enterprise and the stakeholders thereof.
  (c) Patent or Copyright Law.--Nothing in this section shall be 
construed to affect any right under the provisions of title 17 or 35, 
United States Code.
  (d) Report to Congress.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of Science and 
Technology Policy shall transmit a report to Congress describing--
          (1) any priorities established under subsection (b)(5);
          (2) the status of any Federal science agency policies related 
        to public access to the results of federally funded research; 
        and
          (3) how any policies developed or being developed by Federal 
        science agencies, as described in paragraph (2), incorporate 
        input from the non-Federal stakeholders described in subsection 
        (b)(4).
  (e) Definition.--For the purposes of this section, the term ``Federal 
science agency'' means any Federal agency with an annual extramural 
research expenditure of over $100,000,000.

SEC. 124. FULFILLING THE POTENTIAL OF WOMEN IN ACADEMIC SCIENCE AND 
                    ENGINEERING.

  (a) Definition.--In this section, the term ``Federal science agency'' 
means any Federal agency that is responsible for at least 2 percent of 
total Federal research and development funding to institutions of 
higher education, according to the most recent data available from the 
National Science Foundation.
  (b) Workshops to Enhance Gender Equity in Academic Science and 
Engineering.--
          (1) In general.--Not later than 6 months after the date of 
        enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of Science 
        and Technology Policy shall develop a uniform policy for all 
        Federal science agencies to carry out a program of workshops 
        that educate program officers, members of grant review panels, 
        institution of higher education STEM department chairs, and 
        other federally funded researchers about methods that minimize 
        the effects of gender bias in evaluation of Federal research 
        grants and in the related academic advancement of actual and 
        potential recipients of these grants, including hiring, tenure, 
        promotion, and selection for any honor based in part on the 
        recipient's research record.
          (2) Interagency coordination.--The Director of the Office of 
        Science and Technology Policy shall ensure that programs of 
        workshops across the Federal science agencies are coordinated 
        and supported jointly as appropriate. As part of this process, 
        the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy 
        shall ensure that at least 1 workshop is supported every 2 
        years among the Federal science agencies in each of the major 
        science and engineering disciplines supported by those 
        agencies.
          (3) Organizations eligible to carry out workshops.--Federal 
        science agencies may carry out the program of workshops under 
        this subsection by making grants to eligible organizations. In 
        addition to any other organizations made eligible by the 
        Federal science agencies, the following organizations are 
        eligible for grants under this subsection:
                  (A) Nonprofit scientific and professional societies 
                and organizations that represent one or more STEM 
                disciplines.
                  (B) Nonprofit organizations that have the primary 
                mission of advancing the participation of women in 
                STEM.
          (4) Characteristics of workshops.--The workshops shall have 
        the following characteristics:
                  (A) Invitees to workshops shall include at least--
                          (i) the chairs of departments in the relevant 
                        discipline from at least the top 50 
                        institutions of higher education, as determined 
                        by the amount of Federal research and 
                        development funds obligated to each institution 
                        of higher education in the prior year based on 
                        data available from the National Science 
                        Foundation;
                          (ii) members of any standing research grant 
                        review panel appointed by the Federal science 
                        agencies in the relevant discipline;
                          (iii) in the case of science and engineering 
                        disciplines supported by the Department of 
                        Energy, the individuals from each of the 
                        Department of Energy National Laboratories with 
                        personnel management responsibilities 
                        comparable to those of an institution of higher 
                        education department chair; and
                          (iv) Federal science agency program officers 
                        in the relevant discipline, other than program 
                        officers that participate in comparable 
                        workshops organized and run specifically for 
                        that agency's program officers.
                  (B) Activities at the workshops shall include 
                research presentations and interactive discussions or 
                other activities that increase the awareness of the 
                existence of gender bias in the grant-making process 
                and the development of the academic record necessary to 
                qualify as a grant recipient, including recruitment, 
                hiring, tenure review, promotion, and other forms of 
                formal recognition of individual achievement, and 
                provide strategies to overcome such bias.
                  (C) Research presentations and other workshop 
                programs, as appropriate, shall include a discussion of 
                the unique challenges faced by women who are members of 
                historically underrepresented groups.
                  (D) Workshop programs shall include information on 
                best practices and the value of mentoring undergraduate 
                and graduate women students as well as outreach to 
                girls earlier in their STEM education.
          (5) Report.--
                  (A) In general.--Not later than 5 years after the 
                date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the 
                Office of Science and Technology Policy shall transmit 
                to the Committee on Science and Technology of the House 
                of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, 
                Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report 
                evaluating the effectiveness of the program carried out 
                under this subsection to reduce gender bias towards 
                women engaged in research funded by the Federal 
                Government. The Director of the Office of Science and 
                Technology Policy shall include in this report any 
                recommendations for improving the evaluation process 
                described in subparagraph (B).
                  (B) Minimum criteria for evaluation.--In determining 
                the effectiveness of the program, the Director of the 
                Office of Science and Technology Policy shall consider, 
                at a minimum--
                          (i) the rates of participation by invitees in 
                        the workshops authorized under this subsection;
                          (ii) the results of attitudinal surveys 
                        conducted on workshop participants before and 
                        after the workshops;
                          (iii) any relevant institutional policy or 
                        practice changes reported by participants; and
                          (iv) for individuals described in paragraph 
                        (4)(A)(i) or (iii) who participated in at least 
                        1 workshop 3 or more years prior to the due 
                        date for the report, trends in the data for the 
                        department represented by the chair or employee 
                        including faculty data related to gender as 
                        described in section 216.
                  (C) Institutional attendance at workshops.--As part 
                of the report under subparagraph (A), the Director of 
                the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall 
                include a list of institutions of higher education 
                science and engineering departments whose 
                representatives attended the workshops required under 
                this subsection.
          (6) Minimizing costs.--To the extent practicable, workshops 
        shall be held in conjunction with national or regional 
        disciplinary meetings to minimize costs associated with 
        participant travel.
  (c) Extended Research Grant Support and Interim Technical Support for 
Caregivers.--
          (1) Policies for caregivers.--Not later than 6 months after 
        the date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office 
        of Science and Technology Policy shall develop a uniform policy 
        to--
                  (A) extend the period of grant support for federally 
                funded researchers who have caregiving 
                responsibilities; and
                  (B) provide funding for interim technical staff 
                support for federally funded researchers who take a 
                leave of absence for caregiving responsibilities.
          (2) Report.--Upon developing the policy required under 
        paragraph (1), the Director of the Office of Science and 
        Technology Policy shall transmit a copy of the policy to the 
        Committee on Science and Technology of the House of 
        Representatives and to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
        Transportation of the Senate.
  (d) Collection of Data on Federal Research Grants.--
          (1) In general.--Each Federal science agency shall collect 
        standardized annual composite information on demographics, 
        field, award type and budget request, review score, and funding 
        outcome for all applications for research and development 
        grants to institutions of higher education supported by that 
        agency.
          (2) Reporting of data.--
                  (A) The Director of the Office of Science and 
                Technology Policy shall establish a policy to ensure 
                uniformity and standardization of data collection 
                required under paragraph (1).
                  (B) Not later than 2 years after the date of 
                enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, each 
                Federal science agency shall submit data collected 
                under paragraph (1) to the National Science Foundation.
                  (C) The National Science Foundation shall be 
                responsible for storing and publishing all of the grant 
                data submitted under subparagraph (B) in conjunction 
                with the biennial report required under section 37 of 
                the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 
                U.S.C. 1885d).

                 TITLE II--NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.

  This title may be cited as the ``National Science Foundation 
Authorization Act of 2010''.

                     Subtitle A--General Provisions

SEC. 211. DEFINITIONS.

  In this title:
          (1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of 
        the National Science Foundation established under section 2 of 
        the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. 1861).
          (2) Foundation.--The term ``Foundation'' means the National 
        Science Foundation established under section 2 of the National 
        Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. 1861).
          (3) Institution of higher education.--The term ``institution 
        of higher education'' has the meaning given such term in 
        section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
        1001(a)).
          (4) State.--The term ``State'' means one of the several 
        States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto 
        Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the 
        Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, or any other 
        territory or possession of the United States.
          (5) STEM.--The term ``STEM'' means science, technology, 
        engineering, and mathematics.
          (6) United states.--The term ``United States'' means the 
        several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of 
        Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the 
        Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and any other 
        territory or possession of the United States.

SEC. 212. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

  (a) Fiscal Year 2011.--
          (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        the Foundation $7,481,000,000 for fiscal year 2011.
          (2) Specific allocations.--Of the amount authorized under 
        paragraph (1)--
                  (A) $6,020,000,000 shall be made available for 
                research and related activities;
                  (B) $945,000,000 shall be made available for 
                education and human resources;
                  (C) $166,000,000 shall be made available for major 
                research equipment and facilities construction;
                  (D) $330,000,000 shall be made available for agency 
                operations and award management;
                  (E) $4,840,000 shall be made available for the Office 
                of the National Science Board; and
                  (F) $14,830,000 shall be made available for the 
                Office of Inspector General.
  (b) Fiscal Year 2012.--
          (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        the Foundation $8,127,000,000 for fiscal year 2012.
          (2) Specific allocations.--Of the amount authorized under 
        paragraph (1)--
                  (A) $6,496,000,000 shall be made available for 
                research and related activities;
                  (B) $1,020,000,000 shall be made available for 
                education and human resources;
                  (C) $235,000,000 shall be made available for major 
                research equipment and facilities construction;
                  (D) $356,000,000 shall be made available for agency 
                operations and award management;
                  (E) $5,010,000 shall be made available for the Office 
                of the National Science Board; and
                  (F) $15,350,000 shall be made available for the 
                Office of Inspector General.
  (c) Fiscal Year 2013.--
          (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        the Foundation $8,764,000,000 for fiscal year 2013.
          (2) Specific allocations.--Of the amount authorized under 
        paragraph (1)--
                  (A) $7,009,000,000 shall be made available for 
                research and related activities;
                  (B) $1,100,000,000 shall be made available for 
                education and human resources;
                  (C) $250,000,000 shall be made available for major 
                research equipment and facilities construction;
                  (D) $384,000,000 shall be made available for agency 
                operations and award management;
                  (E) $5,180,000 shall be made available for the Office 
                of the National Science Board; and
                  (F) $15,890,000 shall be made available for the 
                Office of Inspector General.
  (d) Fiscal Year 2014.--
          (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        the Foundation $9,436,000,000 for fiscal year 2014.
          (2) Specific allocations.--Of the amount authorized under 
        paragraph (1)--
                  (A) $7,562,000,000 shall be made available for 
                research and related activities;
                  (B) $1,187,000,000 shall be made available for 
                education and human resources;
                  (C) $250,000,000 shall be made available for major 
                research equipment and facilities construction;
                  (D) $415,000,000 shall be made available for agency 
                operations and award management;
                  (E) $5,370,000 shall be made available for the Office 
                of the National Science Board; and
                  (F) $16,440,000 shall be made available for the 
                Office of Inspector General.
  (e) Fiscal Year 2015.--
          (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        the Foundation $10,161,000,000 for fiscal year 2015.
          (2) Specific allocations.--Of the amount authorized under 
        paragraph (1)--
                  (A) $8,160,000,000 shall be made available for 
                research and related activities;
                  (B) $1,281,000,000 shall be made available for 
                education and human resources;
                  (C) $250,000,000 shall be made available for major 
                research equipment and facilities construction;
                  (D) $447,000,000 shall be made available for agency 
                operations and award management;
                  (E) $5,550,000 shall be made available for the Office 
                of the National Science Board; and
                  (F) $17,020,000 shall be made available for the 
                Office of Inspector General.

SEC. 213. NATIONAL SCIENCE BOARD ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENTS.

  (a) Staffing at the National Science Board.--Section 4(g) of the 
National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. 1863(g)) is amended 
by striking ``not more than 5''.
  (b) Science and Engineering Indicators Due Date.--Section 4(j)(1) of 
the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. 1863(j)(1)) is 
amended by striking ``January 15'' and inserting ``May 31''.
  (c) National Science Board Reports.--Section 4(j)(2) of the National 
Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. 1863(j)(2)) is amended by 
inserting ``within the authority of the Foundation (or otherwise as 
requested by the appropriate Congressional committees of jurisdiction 
or the President)'' after ``individual policy matters''.
  (d) Board Adherence to Sunshine Act.--Section 15(a) of the National 
Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 1862n-5(a)) is 
amended--
          (1) by striking paragraph (3) and redesignating paragraphs 
        (4) and (5) as paragraphs (3) and (4), respectively;
          (2) in paragraph (3), as so redesignated by paragraph (1) of 
        this subsection--
                  (A) by striking ``February 15'' and inserting ``April 
                15''; and
                  (B) by striking ``the audit required under paragraph 
                (3) along with'' and inserting ``any''; and
          (3) in paragraph (4), as so redesignated by paragraph (1) of 
        this subsection, by striking ``To facilitate the audit required 
        under paragraph (3) of this subsection, the'' and inserting 
        ``The''.

SEC. 214. BROADER IMPACTS REVIEW CRITERION.

  (a) Goals.--The Foundation shall apply a Broader Impacts Review 
Criterion to achieve the following goals:
          (1) Increased economic competitiveness of the United States.
          (2) Development of a globally competitive STEM workforce.
          (3) Increased participation of women and underrepresented 
        minorities in STEM.
          (4) Increased partnerships between academia and industry.
          (5) Improved pre-K-12 STEM education and teacher development.
          (6) Improved undergraduate STEM education.
          (7) Increased public scientific literacy.
          (8) Increased national security.
  (b) Policy.--Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of 
this Act, the Director shall develop and implement a policy for the 
Broader Impacts Review Criterion that--
          (1) provides for educating professional staff at the 
        Foundation, merit review panels, and applicants for Foundation 
        research grants on the policy developed under this subsection;
          (2) clarifies that the activities of grant recipients 
        undertaken to satisfy the Broader Impacts Review Criterion 
        shall--
                  (A) to the extent practicable employ proven 
                strategies and models and draw on existing programs and 
                activities; and
                  (B) when novel approaches are justified, build on the 
                most current research results;
          (3) allows for some portion of funds allocated to broader 
        impacts under a research grant to be used for assessment and 
        evaluation of the broader impacts activity;
          (4) encourages institutions of higher education and other 
        nonprofit education or research organizations to develop and 
        provide, either as individual institutions or in partnerships 
        thereof, appropriate training and programs to assist 
        Foundation-funded principal investigators at their institutions 
        in achieving the goals of the Broader Impacts Review Criterion 
        as described in subsection (a); and
          (5) requires principal investigators applying for Foundation 
        research grants to provide evidence of institutional support 
        for the portion of the investigator's proposal designed to 
        satisfy the Broader Impacts Review Criterion, including 
        evidence of relevant training, programs, and other 
        institutional resources available to the investigator from 
        either their home institution or organization or another 
        institution or organization with relevant expertise.

SEC. 215. NATIONAL CENTER FOR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING STATISTICS.

  (a) Establishment.--There is established within the Foundation a 
National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (in this section 
referred to as the ``Center''), that shall serve as a central Federal 
clearinghouse for the collection, interpretation, analysis, and 
dissemination of objective data on science, engineering, technology, 
and research and development.
  (b) Duties.--In carrying out subsection (a) of this section, the 
Director, acting through the Center shall--
          (1) collect, acquire, analyze, report, and disseminate 
        statistical data related to the science and engineering 
        enterprise in the United States and other nations that is 
        relevant and useful to practitioners, researchers, 
        policymakers, and the public, including statistical data on--
                  (A) research and development trends;
                  (B) the science and engineering workforce;
                  (C) United States competitiveness in science, 
                engineering, technology, and research and development; 
                and
                  (D) the condition and progress of United States STEM 
                education;
          (2) support research using the data it collects, and on 
        methodologies in areas related to the work of the Center; and
          (3) support the education and training of researchers in the 
        use of large-scale, nationally representative data sets.
  (c) Statistical Reports.--The Director or the National Science Board, 
acting through the Center, shall issue regular, and as necessary, 
special statistical reports on topics related to the national and 
international science and engineering enterprise such as the biennial 
report required by section 4 (j)(1) of the National Science Foundation 
Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. 1863(j)(1)) on indicators of the state of 
science and engineering in the United States.

SEC. 216. COLLECTION OF DATA ON DEMOGRAPHICS OF FACULTY.

  (a) Collection of Data.--The Director shall report, in conjunction 
with the biennial report required under section 37 of the Science and 
Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C.19 1885d), statistical 
summary data on the demographics of STEM discipline faculty at 
institutions of higher education in the United States. At a minimum, 
the Director shall consider--
          (1) the number and percent of faculty by gender, race, and 
        age;
          (2) the number and percent of faculty at each rank, by 
        gender, race, and age;
          (3) the number and percent of faculty who are in nontenure-
        track positions, including teaching and research, by gender, 
        race, and age;
          (4) the number of faculty who are reviewed for promotion, 
        including tenure, and the percentage of that number who are 
        promoted, by gender, race, and age;
          (5) faculty years in rank by gender, race, and age;
          (6) faculty attrition by gender, race, and age;
          (7) the number and percent of faculty hired by rank, gender, 
        race, and age; and
          (8) the number and percent of faculty in leadership 
        positions, including endowed or named chairs, serving on 
        promotion and tenure committees, by gender, race, and age.
  (b) Recommendations.--The Director shall solicit input and 
recommendations from relevant stakeholders, including representatives 
from institutions of higher education and nonprofit organizations, on 
the collection of data required under subsection (a), including the 
development of standard definitions on the terms and categories to be 
used in the collection of such data.
  (c) Report to Congress.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Director shall submit a report to Congress 
on how the Foundation will gather the demographic data on STEM faculty, 
including--
          (1) a description of the data to be reported and the sources 
        of those data;
          (2) justification for the exclusion of any data described in 
        paragraph (1); and
          (3) a list of the definitions for the terms and categories, 
        such as ``faculty'' and ``leadership positions'', to be applied 
        in the reporting of all data described in paragraph (1).

                  Subtitle B--Research and Innovation

SEC. 221. SUPPORT FOR POTENTIALLY TRANSFORMATIVE RESEARCH.

  (a) Policy.--The Director shall establish a policy that requires the 
Foundation to use at least 5 percent of its research budget to fund 
high-risk, high-reward basic research proposals. Support for facilities 
and infrastructure, including preconstruction design and operations and 
maintenance of major research facilities, shall not be counted as part 
of the research budget for the purposes of this section.
  (b) Implementation.--In implementing such policy, the Foundation 
may--
          (1) develop solicitations specifically for high-risk, high-
        reward basic research;
          (2) establish review panels for the primary purpose of 
        selecting high-risk, high-reward proposals or modify 
        instructions to standard review panels to require 
        identification of high-risk, high-reward proposals; and
          (3) support workshops and participate in conferences with the 
        primary purpose of identifying new opportunities for high-risk, 
        high-reward basic research, especially at interdisciplinary 
        interfaces.
  (c) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term ``high-risk, 
high-reward basic research'' means research driven by ideas that have 
the potential to radically change our understanding of an important 
existing scientific or engineering concept, or leading to the creation 
of a new paradigm or field of science or engineering, and that is 
characterized by its challenge to current understanding or its pathway 
to new frontiers.

SEC. 222. FACILITATING INTERDISCIPLINARY COLLABORATIONS FOR NATIONAL 
                    NEEDS.

  (a) In General.--The Director shall award competitive, merit-based 
awards in amounts not to exceed $5,000,000 over a period of up to 5 
years to interdisciplinary research collaborations that are likely to 
assist in addressing critical challenges to national security, 
competitiveness, and societal well-being and that--
          (1) involve at least 2 co-equal principal investigators at 
        the same or different institutions;
          (2) draw upon well-integrated, diverse teams of 
        investigators, including students or postdoctoral researchers, 
        from one or more disciplines; and
          (3) foster creativity and pursue high-risk, high-reward 
        research.
  (b) Priority.--In selecting grant recipients under this section, the 
Director shall give priority to applicants that propose to utilize 
advances in cyberinfrastructure and simulation-based science and 
engineering.

SEC. 223. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION MANUFACTURING RESEARCH AND 
                    EDUCATION.

  (a) Manufacturing Research.--The Director shall carry out a program 
to award merit-reviewed, competitive grants to institutions of higher 
education to support fundamental research leading to transformative 
advances in manufacturing technologies, processes, and enterprises that 
will support United States manufacturing through improved performance, 
productivity, sustainability, and competitiveness. Research areas may 
include--
          (1) nanomanufacturing;
          (2) manufacturing and construction machines and equipment, 
        including robotics, automation, and other intelligent systems;
          (3) manufacturing enterprise systems;
          (4) advanced sensing and control techniques;
          (5) materials processing; and
          (6) information technologies for manufacturing, including 
        predictive and real-time models and simulations, and virtual 
        manufacturing.
  (b) Manufacturing Education.--In order to help ensure a well-trained 
manufacturing workforce, the Director shall award grants to strengthen 
and expand scientific and technical education and training in advanced 
manufacturing, including through the Foundation's Advanced 
Technological Education program.

SEC. 224. STRENGTHENING INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH PARTNERSHIPS.

  (a) In General.--For any Foundation research grant, in an amount 
greater than $2,000,000, to be carried out through a partnership that 
includes one or more minority-serving institutions or predominantly 
undergraduate institutions and one or more institutions described in 
subsection (b), the Director shall award funds directly, according to 
the budget justification described in the grant proposal, to at least 
two of the institutions of higher education in the partnership, 
including at least one minority-serving institution or one 
predominantly undergraduate institution, to ensure a strong and 
equitable partnership.
  (b) Institutions.--The institutions referred to in subsection (a) are 
institutions of higher education that are among the 100 institutions 
receiving, over the 3-year period immediately preceding the awarding of 
grants, the highest amount of research funding from the Foundation.

SEC. 225. NATIONAL SCIENCE BOARD REPORT ON MID-SCALE INSTRUMENTATION.

  (a) Mid-scale Research Instrumentation Needs.--The National Science 
Board shall evaluate the needs, across all disciplines supported by the 
Foundation, for mid-scale research instrumentation that falls between 
the instruments funded by the Major Research Instrumentation program 
and the very large projects funded by the Major Research Equipment and 
Facilities Construction program.
  (b) Report on Mid-scale Research Instrumentation Program.--Not later 
than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the National 
Science Board shall submit to Congress a report on mid-scale research 
instrumentation at the Foundation. At a minimum, this report shall 
include--
          (1) the findings from the Board's evaluation of 
        instrumentation needs required under subsection (a), including 
        a description of differences across disciplines and Foundation 
        research directorates;
          (2) a recommendation or recommendations regarding how the 
        Foundation should set priorities for mid-scale instrumentation 
        across disciplines and Foundation research directorates;
          (3) a recommendation or recommendations regarding the 
        appropriateness of expanding existing programs, including the 
        Major Research Instrumentation program or the Major Research 
        Equipment and Facilities Construction program, to support more 
        instrumentation at the mid-scale;
          (4) a recommendation or recommendations regarding the need 
        for and appropriateness of a new, Foundation-wide program or 
        initiative in support of mid-scale instrumentation, including 
        any recommendations regarding the administration of and budget 
        for such a program or initiative and the appropriate scope of 
        instruments to be funded under such a program or initiative; 
        and
          (5) any recommendation or recommendations regarding other 
        options for supporting mid-scale research instrumentation at 
        the Foundation.

SEC. 226. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON OVERALL SUPPORT FOR RESEARCH 
                    INFRASTRUCTURE AT THE FOUNDATION.

  It is the sense of Congress that the Foundation should strive to keep 
the percentage of the Foundation budget devoted to research 
infrastructure in the range of 24 to 27 percent, as recommended in the 
2003 National Science Board report entitled ``Science and Engineering 
Infrastructure for the 21st Century''.

SEC. 227. PARTNERSHIPS FOR INNOVATION.

  (a) In General.--The Director shall carry out a program to award 
merit-reviewed, competitive grants to institutions of higher education 
to establish and to expand partnerships that promote innovation and 
increase the economic and social impact of research by developing tools 
and resources to connect new scientific discoveries to practical uses.
  (b) Partnerships.--
          (1) In general.--To be eligible for funding under this 
        section, an institution of higher education must propose 
        establishment of a partnership that--
                  (A) includes at least one private sector entity; and
                  (B) may include other institutions of higher 
                education, public sector institutions, private sector 
                entities, and social enterprise nonprofit 
                organizations.
          (2) Priority.--In selecting grant recipients under this 
        section, the Director shall give priority to partnerships that 
        include one or more institutions of higher education that are 
        among the 100 institutions receiving, over the 3-year period 
        immediately preceding the awarding of grants, the highest 
        amount of research funding from the Foundation and at least one 
        of the following:
                  (A) A minority serving institution.
                  (B) A primarily undergraduate institution.
                  (C) A 2-year institution of higher education.
  (c) Program.--Proposals funded under this section shall seek to--
          (1) increase the economic or social impact of the most 
        promising research at the institution or institutions of higher 
        education that are members of the partnership through knowledge 
        transfer or commercialization;
          (2) increase the engagement of faculty and students across 
        multiple disciplines and departments, including faculty and 
        students in schools of business and other appropriate non-STEM 
        fields and disciplines in knowledge transfer activities;
          (3) enhance education and mentoring of students and faculty 
        in innovation and entrepreneurship through networks, courses, 
        and development of best practices and curricula;
          (4) strengthen the culture of the institution or institutions 
        of higher education to undertake and participate in activities 
        related to innovation and leading to economic or social impact;
          (5) broaden the participation of all types of institutions of 
        higher education in activities to meet STEM workforce needs and 
        promote innovation and knowledge transfer; and
          (6) build lasting partnerships with local and regional 
        businesses, local and State governments, and other relevant 
        entities.
  (d) Additional Criteria.--In selecting grant recipients under this 
section, the Director shall also consider the extent to which the 
applicants are able to demonstrate evidence of institutional support 
for, and commitment to--
          (1) achieving the goals of the program as described in 
        subsection (c);
          (2) expansion to an institution-wide program if the initial 
        proposal is not for an institution-wide program; and
          (3) sustaining any new innovation tools and resources 
        generated from funding under this program.
  (e) Limitation.--No funds provided under this section may be used to 
construct or renovate a building or structure.

SEC. 228. PRIZE AWARDS.

  (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Generating 
Extraordinary New Innovations in the United States Act of 2010''.
  (b) In General.--The Director shall carry out a pilot program to 
award innovation inducement cash prizes in any area of research 
supported by the Foundation. The Director may carry out a program of 
cash prizes only in conformity with this section.
  (c) Topics.--In identifying topics for prize competitions under this 
section, the Director shall--
          (1) consult widely both within and outside the Federal 
        Government;
          (2) give priority to high-risk, high-reward research 
        challenges and to problems whose solution could improve the 
        economic competitiveness of the United States; and
          (3) give consideration to the extent to which the topics have 
        the potential to raise public awareness about federally 
        sponsored research.
  (d) Types of Contests.--The Director shall consider all categories of 
innovation inducement prizes, including--
          (1) contests in which the award is to the first team or 
        individual who accomplishes a stated objective; and
          (2) contests in which the winner is the team or individual 
        who comes closest to achieving an objective within a specified 
        time.
  (e) Advertising and Announcement.--
          (1) Advertising and solicitation of competitors.--The 
        Director shall widely advertise prize competitions to encourage 
        broad participation, including by individuals, institutions of 
        higher education, nonprofit organizations, and businesses.
          (2) Announcement through federal register notice.--The 
        Director shall announce each prize competition by publishing a 
        notice in the Federal Register. This notice shall include the 
        subject of the competition, the duration of the competition, 
        the eligibility requirements for participation in the 
        competition, the process for participants to register for the 
        competition, the amount of the prize, and the criteria for 
        awarding the prize, including the method by which the prize 
        winner or winners will be selected.
          (3) Time to announcement.--The Director shall announce a 
        prize competition within 18 months after receipt of 
        appropriated funds.
  (f) Funding.--
          (1) Funding sources.--Prizes under this section shall consist 
        of Federal appropriated funds and any funds raised pursuant to 
        donations authorized under section 11(f) of the National 
        Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. 1870(f)) for specific 
        prize competitions.
          (2) Announcement of prizes.--The Director may not issue a 
        notice as required by subsection (e)(2) until all of the funds 
        needed to pay out the announced amount of the prize have been 
        appropriated or committed in writing by another entity pursuant 
        to paragraph (1).
  (g) Eligibility.--To be eligible to win a prize under this section, 
an individual or entity--
          (1) shall have complied with all of the requirements under 
        this section;
          (2) in the case of a private entity, shall be incorporated in 
        and maintain a primary place of business in the United States, 
        and in the case of an individual, whether participating singly 
        or in a group, shall be a United States citizen or national, or 
        an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent 
        residence;
          (3) shall not be a Federal entity, a Federal employee acting 
        within the scope of his or her employment, or a person employed 
        at a Federal laboratory acting within the scope of his or her 
        employment; and
          (4) shall not have utilized Federal funds to engage in the 
        research for which the prize is being awarded.
  (h) Awards.--
          (1) Number of competitions.--The Director may announce up to 
        5 prize competitions through the end of fiscal year 2013.
          (2) Size of award.--The Director may determine the amount of 
        each prize award based on the prize topic, but no award shall 
        be less than $1,000,000 or greater than $3,000,000.
          (3) Selecting winners.--The Director may convene an expert 
        panel to select a winner of a prize competition. If the panel 
        is unable to select a winner, the Director shall determine the 
        winner of the prize.
          (4) Public outreach.--The Director shall publicly award 
        prizes utilizing the Foundation's existing public affairs and 
        public outreach resources.
  (i) Administering the Competition.--The Director may enter into an 
agreement with a private, nonprofit entity to administer the prize 
competition, subject to the provisions of this section.
  (j) Intellectual Property.--The Federal Government shall not, by 
virtue of offering or awarding a prize under this section, be entitled 
to any intellectual property rights derived as a consequence of, or in 
direct relation to, the participation by a registered participant in a 
competition authorized by this section. This subsection shall not be 
construed to prevent the Federal Government from negotiating a license 
for the use of intellectual property developed for a prize competition 
under this section.
  (k) Liability.--The Director may require a registered participant in 
a prize competition under this section to waive liability against the 
Federal Government for injuries and damages that result from 
participation in such competition.
  (l) Nonsubstitution.--Any programs created under this section shall 
not be considered a substitute for Federal research and development 
programs.
  (m) Reporting Requirement.--Not later than 5 years after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the National Science Board shall transmit to 
Congress a report containing the results of a review and assessment of 
the pilot program under this section, including--
          (1) a description of the nature and status of all completed 
        or ongoing prize competitions carried out under this section, 
        including any scientific achievements, publications, 
        intellectual property, or commercialized technology that 
        resulted from such competitions;
          (2) any recommendations regarding changes to, the termination 
        of, or continuation of the pilot program;
          (3) an analysis of whether the program is attracting 
        contestants more diverse than the Foundation's traditional 
        academic constituency;
          (4) an analysis of whether public awareness of innovation or 
        of the goal of the particular prize or prizes is enhanced;
          (5) an analysis of whether the Foundation's public image or 
        ability to increase public scientific literacy is enhanced 
        through the use of innovation inducement prizes; and
          (6) an analysis of the extent to which private funds are 
        being used to support registered participants.
  (n) Early Termination of Contests.--The Director shall terminate a 
prize contest before any registered participant wins if the Director 
determines that an unregistered entity has produced an innovation that 
would otherwise have qualified for the prize award.
  (o) Authorization of Appropriations.--
          (1) In general.--
                  (A) Awards.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
                to the Director for the period encompassing fiscal 
                years 2011 through 2013 $12,000,000 for carrying out 
                this section.
                  (B) Administration.--Of the amounts authorized in 
                subparagraph (A), not more than 15 percent for each 
                fiscal year shall be available for the administrative 
                costs of carrying out this section.
          (2) Carryover of funds.--Funds appropriated for prize awards 
        under this section shall remain available until expended, and 
        may be transferred, reprogrammed, or expended for other 
        purposes as authorized by law only after the expiration of 7 
        fiscal years after the fiscal year for which the funds were 
        originally appropriated. No provision in this section permits 
        obligation or payment of funds in violation of section 1341 of 
        title 31 of the United States Code (commonly referred to as the 
        Anti-Deficiency Act).

           Subtitle C--STEM Education and Workforce Training

SEC. 241. GRADUATE STUDENT SUPPORT.

  (a) Finding.--The Congress finds that--
          (1) the Integrative Graduate Education and Research 
        Traineeship program is an important program for training the 
        next generation of scientists and engineers in team-based 
        interdisciplinary research and problem solving, and for 
        providing them with the many additional skills, such as 
        communication skills, needed to thrive in diverse STEM careers; 
        and
          (2) the Integrative Graduate Education and Research 
        Traineeship program is no less valuable to the preparation and 
        support of graduate students than the Foundation's Graduate 
        Research Fellowship program.
  (b) Equal Treatment of IGERT and GRF.--Beginning in fiscal year 2011, 
the Director shall increase or, if necessary, decrease funding for the 
Foundation's Integrative Graduate Education and Research Traineeship 
program (or any program by which it is replaced) at least at the same 
rate as it increases or decreases funding for the Graduate Research 
Fellowship program.
  (c) Support for Graduate Student Research From the Research 
Account.--For each of the fiscal years 2011 through 2015, at least 50 
percent of the total Foundation funds allocated to the Integrative 
Graduate Education and Research Traineeship program and the Graduate 
Research Fellowship program shall come from funds appropriated for 
Research and Related Activities.
  (d) Cost of Education Allowance for GRF Program.--Section 10 of the 
National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. 1869) is amended--
          (1) by inserting ``(a)'' before ``The Foundation is 
        authorized''; and
          (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
  ``(b) The Director shall establish for each year the amount to be 
awarded for scholarships and fellowships under this section for that 
year. Each such scholarship and fellowship shall include a cost of 
education allowance of $12,000, subject to any restrictions on the use 
of cost of education allowance as determined by the Director.''.

SEC. 242. POSTDOCTORAL FELLOWSHIP IN STEM EDUCATION RESEARCH.

  (a) In General.--The Director shall establish postdoctoral 
fellowships in STEM education research to provide recent doctoral 
degree graduates in STEM fields with the necessary skills to assume 
leadership roles in STEM education research, program development, and 
evaluation in our Nation's diverse educational institutions.
  (b) Awards.--
          (1) Duration.--Fellowships may be awarded under this section 
        for a period of up to 24 months in duration, renewable for an 
        additional 12 months. The Director shall establish criteria for 
        eligibility for renewal of the fellowship.
          (2) Stipend.--The Director shall determine the amount of the 
        award for a fellowship, which shall include a stipend and a 
        research allowance, and may include an educational allowance.
          (3) Location.--A fellowship shall be awarded for research at 
        any institution of higher education that offers degrees in 
        fields supported by the Foundation, or at any institution or 
        organization that the Director determines is eligible for 
        education research grants from the Foundation.
          (4) Number of awards.--The Director may award up to 20 new 
        fellowships per year.
  (c) Research.--Fellowships under this section shall be awarded for 
research on STEM education at any educational level, including grades 
pre-K-12, undergraduate, graduate, and general public education, in 
both formal and informal settings. Research topics may include--
          (1) learning processes and progressions;
          (2) knowledge transfer, including curriculum development;
          (3) uses of technology as teaching and learning tools;
          (4) integrating STEM fields; and
          (5) assessment of student learning and program evaluation.
  (d) Eligibility.--To be eligible for a fellowship under this section, 
an individual must--
          (1) be a United States citizen or national, or an alien 
        lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence, 
        at the time of application; and
          (2) have received a doctoral degree in one of the STEM fields 
        supported by the Foundation within 3 years prior to the 
        fellowship application deadline.

SEC. 243. ROBERT NOYCE TEACHER SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM.

  Section 10A of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 
2002 (42 U.S.C. 1862n-1a) is amended in subsection (h)(1) by--
          (1) striking ``50'' and inserting ``30''; and
          (2) striking ``which may be provided in cash or in-kind'' and 
        inserting ``which shall be provided in cash''.

SEC. 244. INSTITUTIONS SERVING PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES.

  For the purposes of the activities and programs supported by the 
Foundation, institutions of higher education chartered to serve large 
numbers of students with disabilities, including Gallaudet University, 
Landmark College, and the National Technical Institute for the Deaf, 
shall have a designation consistent with the designation for other 
institutions that serve populations underrepresented in STEM to ensure 
that institutions of higher education chartered to serve persons with 
disabilities can benefit from STEM bridge programs and from research 
partnerships with major research universities. Nothing in this section 
shall be construed to amend or otherwise affect any of the definitions 
for minority-serving institutions under title III or title V of the 
Higher Education Act of 1965.

SEC. 245. INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRATION.

  (a) Innovation Through Institutional Integration.--The Director shall 
award grants for the institutional integration of projects funded by 
the Foundation with a focus on education, or on broadening 
participation in STEM by underrepresented groups, for the purpose of 
increasing collaboration and coordination across funded projects and 
institutions and expanding the impact of such projects within and among 
institutions of higher education in an innovative and sustainable 
manner.
  (b) Program Activities.--The program under this section shall support 
integrative activities that involve the strategic and innovative 
combination of Foundation-funded projects and that provide for--
          (1) additional opportunities to increase the recruitment, 
        retention, and degree attainment of underrepresented groups in 
        STEM disciplines;
          (2) the inclusion of programming, practices, and policies 
        that encourage the integration of education and research;
          (3) seamless transitions from one educational level to 
        another; and
          (4) other activities that expand and deepen the impact of 
        Foundation-funded projects with a focus on education, or on 
        broadening participation in STEM by underrepresented groups, 
        and enhance their sustainability.
  (c) Review Criteria.--In selecting recipients of grants under this 
section, the Director shall consider at a minimum--
          (1) the extent to which the proposed project addresses the 
        goals of project and program integration and adds value to the 
        existing funded projects;
          (2) the extent to which there is a proven record of success 
        for the existing projects on which the proposed integration 
        project is based; and
          (3) the extent to which the proposed project addresses the 
        modification of programming, practices, and policies necessary 
        to achieve the purpose described in subsection (a).
  (d) Priority.--In selecting recipients of grants under this section, 
the Director shall give priority to proposals for which a senior 
institutional administrator, including a dean or other administrator of 
equal or higher rank, serves as the principal investigator.

SEC. 246. POSTDOCTORAL RESEARCH FELLOWSHIPS.

  (a) In General.--The Director shall establish a Foundation-wide 
postdoctoral research fellowship program, to award competitive, merit-
based postdoctoral research fellowships in any field of research 
supported by the Foundation.
  (b) Duration and Amount.--Fellowships may be awarded under this 
section for a period of up to 3 years in duration. The Director shall 
determine the amount of the award for a fellowship, which shall include 
a stipend and a research allowance, and may include an educational 
allowance.
  (c) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a fellowship under this 
section, an individual--
          (1) must be a United States citizen or national, or an alien 
        lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence, 
        at the time of application;
          (2) must have received a doctoral degree in any field of 
        research supported by the Foundation within 3 years prior to 
        the fellowship application deadline, or will complete a 
        doctoral degree no more than 1 year after the application 
        deadline; and
          (3) may not have previously received funding as the principal 
        investigator of a research grant from the Foundation, unless 
        such funding was received as a graduate student.
  (d) Priority.--In evaluating applications for fellowships under this 
section, the Director shall give priority to applications that 
include--
          (1) proposals for interdisciplinary research; or
          (2) proposals for high-risk, high-reward research.
  (e) Additional Considerations.--In evaluating applications for 
fellowships under this section, the Director shall give consideration 
to the goal of promoting the participation of individuals identified in 
section 33 or 34 of the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act 
(42 U.S.C. 1885a or 1885b).
  (f) Nonsubstitution.--The fellowship program authorized under this 
section is not intended to replace or reduce support for postdoctoral 
research through existing programs at the Foundation.

SEC. 247. BROADENING PARTICIPATION TRAINING AND OUTREACH.

  The Director shall provide education and training--
          (1) to Foundation staff and grant proposal review panels on 
        effective mechanisms and tools for broadening participation in 
        STEM by underrepresented groups, including reviewer selection 
        and mitigation of implicit bias in the review process; and
          (2) to Foundation staff on related outreach approaches.

SEC. 248. TRANSFORMING UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION IN STEM.

  Section 17 of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 
2002 (42 U.S.C. 1862n-6) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 17. TRANSFORMING UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION IN STEM.

  ``(a) In General.--The Director shall award grants, on a competitive, 
merit-reviewed basis, to institutions of higher education (or to 
consortia thereof) to reform undergraduate STEM education for the 
purpose of increasing the number and quality of students studying 
toward and completing baccalaureate degrees in STEM and improving the 
STEM learning outcomes for all undergraduate students, including 
through--
          ``(1) development, implementation, and assessment of 
        innovative, research-based approaches to transforming the 
        teaching and learning of disciplinary or interdisciplinary STEM 
        at the undergraduate level; and
          ``(2) expansion of successful STEM reform efforts beyond a 
        single course or group of courses to achieve reform within an 
        entire academic unit, or expansion of successful reform efforts 
        beyond a single academic unit to other STEM academic units 
        within an institution or to comparable academic units at other 
        institutions.
  ``(b) Uses of Funds.--Activities supported by grants under this 
section may include--
          ``(1) creation of multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary 
        courses or programs that formalize collaborations for the 
        purpose of improved student instruction and research in STEM;
          ``(2) expansion of undergraduate STEM research opportunities 
        to include interdisciplinary research opportunities and 
        research opportunities in industry, at Federal labs, and at 
        international research institutions or research sites;
          ``(3) implementation or expansion of bridge programs, 
        including programs that address student transition from 2-year 
        to 4-year institutions, and cohort, tutoring, or mentoring 
        programs proven to enhance student recruitment or persistence 
        to degree completion in STEM, including recruitment or 
        persistence to degree completion of individuals identified in 
        section 33 or 34 of the Science and Engineering Equal 
        Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 1885b);
          ``(4) improvement of undergraduate STEM education for 
        nonmajors, including education majors;
          ``(5) implementation of evidence-based, technology-driven 
        reform efforts that directly impact undergraduate STEM 
        instruction or research experiences;
          ``(6) development and implementation of faculty and graduate 
        teaching assistant development programs focused on improved 
        instruction, mentoring, assessment of student learning, and 
        support of undergraduate STEM students;
          ``(7) support for graduate students and postdoctoral fellows 
        to participate in instructional or assessment activities at 
        primarily undergraduate institutions;
          ``(8) research on teaching and learning of STEM at the 
        undergraduate level related to the proposed reform effort, 
        including assessment and evaluation of the proposed reform 
        activities, research on scalability and sustainability of 
        approaches to reform, and development and implementation of 
        longitudinal studies of students included in the proposed 
        reform effort; and
          ``(9) support for initiatives that advance the integration of 
        global challenges such as sustainability into disciplinary and 
        interdisciplinary STEM education.
  ``(c) Partnership.--An institution of higher education may partner 
with one or more other nonprofit education or research organizations, 
including scientific and engineering societies, for the purposes of 
carrying out the activities authorized under this section.
  ``(d) Selection Process.--
          ``(1) Applications.--An institution of higher education 
        seeking a grant under this section shall submit an application 
        to the Director at such time, in such manner, and containing 
        such information as the Director may require. The application 
        shall include, at a minimum--
                  ``(A) a description of the proposed reform effort;
                  ``(B) a description of the research findings that 
                will serve as the basis for the proposed reform effort 
                or, in the case of applications that propose an 
                expansion of a previously implemented reform effort, a 
                description of the previously implemented reform 
                effort, including indicators of success such as data on 
                student recruitment, persistence to degree completion, 
                and academic achievement;
                  ``(C) evidence of institutional support for, and 
                commitment to, the proposed reform effort, including 
                long-term commitment to implement successful strategies 
                from the current reform effort beyond the academic unit 
                or units included in the grant proposal or to 
                disseminate successful strategies to other 
                institutions;
                  ``(D) a description of existing or planned 
                institutional policies and practices regarding faculty 
                hiring, promotion, tenure, and teaching assignment that 
                reward faculty contributions to undergraduate STEM 
                education; and
                  ``(E) a description of the plans for assessment and 
                evaluation of the proposed reform activities, including 
                evidence of participation by individuals with 
                experience in assessment and evaluation of teaching and 
                learning programs.
          ``(2) Review of applications.--In selecting grant recipients 
        under this section, the Director shall consider at a minimum--
                  ``(A) the likelihood of success in undertaking the 
                proposed effort at the institution submitting the 
                application, including the extent to which the faculty, 
                staff, and administrators of the institution are 
                committed to making the proposed institutional reform a 
                priority of the participating academic unit or units;
                  ``(B) the degree to which the proposed reform will 
                contribute to change in institutional culture and 
                policy such that a greater value is placed on faculty 
                engagement in undergraduate education;
                  ``(C) the likelihood that the institution will 
                sustain or expand the reform beyond the period of the 
                grant; and
                  ``(D) the degree to which scholarly assessment and 
                evaluation plans are included in the design of the 
                reform effort, including the degree to which such 
                assessment and evaluation contribute to the systematic 
                accumulation of knowledge on STEM education.
          ``(3) Priority.--For proposals that include an expansion of 
        existing reform efforts beyond a single academic unit, the 
        Director shall give priority to proposals for which a senior 
        institutional administrator, including a dean or other 
        administrator of equal or higher rank, serves as the principal 
        investigator or a coprincipal investigator.
          ``(4) Grant distribution.--The Director shall ensure, to the 
        extent practicable, that grants awarded under this section are 
        made to a variety of types of institutions of higher 
        education.''.

SEC. 249. 21ST CENTURY GRADUATE EDUCATION.

  (a) In General.--The Director shall award grants, on a competitive, 
merit-reviewed basis, to institutions of higher education to implement 
or expand research-based reforms in master's and doctoral level STEM 
education that emphasize preparation for diverse careers utilizing STEM 
degrees, including at diverse types of institutions of higher 
education, in industry, and at government agencies and research 
laboratories.
  (b) Uses of Funds.--Activities supported by grants under this section 
may include--
          (1) creation of multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary 
        courses or programs for the purpose of improved student 
        instruction and research in STEM;
          (2) expansion of graduate STEM research opportunities to 
        include interdisciplinary research opportunities and research 
        opportunities in industry, at Federal laboratories, and at 
        international research institutions or research sites;
          (3) development and implementation of future faculty training 
        programs focused on improved instruction, mentoring, assessment 
        of student learning, and support of undergraduate STEM 
        students;
          (4) support and training for graduate students to participate 
        in instructional activities beyond the traditional teaching 
        assistantship, and especially as part of ongoing educational 
        reform efforts, including at pre-K-12 schools, informal science 
        education institutions, and primarily undergraduate 
        institutions;
          (5) creation, improvement, or expansion of innovative 
        graduate programs such as science master's degree programs;
          (6) development and implementation of seminars, workshops, 
        and other professional development activities that increase the 
        ability of graduate students to engage in innovation, 
        technology transfer, and entrepreneurship;
          (7) development and implementation of seminars, workshops, 
        and other professional development activities that increase the 
        ability of graduate students to effectively communicate their 
        research findings to technical audiences outside of their own 
        discipline and to nontechnical audiences;
          (8) expansion of successful STEM reform efforts beyond a 
        single academic unit to other STEM academic units within an 
        institution or to comparable academic units at other 
        institutions; and
          (9) research on teaching and learning of STEM at the graduate 
        level related to the proposed reform effort, including 
        assessment and evaluation of the proposed reform activities and 
        research on scalability and sustainability of approaches to 
        reform.
  (c) Partnership.--An institution of higher education may partner with 
one or more other nonprofit education or research organizations, 
including scientific and engineering societies, for the purposes of 
carrying out the activities authorized under this section.
  (d) Selection Process.--
          (1) Applications.--An institution of higher education seeking 
        a grant under this section shall submit an application to the 
        Director at such time, in such manner, and containing such 
        information as the Director may require. The application shall 
        include, at a minimum--
                  (A) a description of the proposed reform effort;
                  (B) in the case of applications that propose an 
                expansion of a previously implemented reform effort at 
                the applicant's institution or at other institutions, a 
                description of the previously implemented reform 
                effort;
                  (C) evidence of institutional support for, and 
                commitment to, the proposed reform effort, including 
                long-term commitment to implement successful strategies 
                from the current reform effort beyond the academic unit 
                or units included in the grant proposal or to 
                disseminate successful strategies to other 
                institutions; and
                  (D) a description of the plans for assessment and 
                evaluation of the grant proposed reform activities.
          (2) Review of applications.--In selecting grant recipients 
        under this section, the Director shall consider at a minimum--
                  (A) the likelihood of success in undertaking the 
                proposed effort at the institution submitting the 
                application, including the extent to which the faculty, 
                staff, and administrators of the institution are 
                committed to making the proposed institutional reform a 
                priority of the participating academic unit or units;
                  (B) the degree to which the proposed reform will 
                contribute to change in institutional culture and 
                policy such that a greater value is placed on preparing 
                graduate students for diverse careers utilizing STEM 
                degrees;
                  (C) the likelihood that the institution will sustain 
                or expand the reform beyond the period of the grant; 
                and
                  (D) the degree to which scholarly assessment and 
                evaluation plans are included in the design of the 
                reform effort.
  (e) Repeal.--Section 7034 of the America COMPETES Act (42 U.S.C. 
1862o-13) is repealed.

SEC. 250. UNDERGRADUATE BROADENING PARTICIPATION PROGRAM.

  (a) Undergraduate Broadening Participation Program.--The Foundation 
shall continue to support the Historically Black Colleges and 
Universities Undergraduate Program, the Louis Stokes Alliances for 
Minority Participation program, and the Tribal Colleges and 
Universities Program as separate programs at least through September 
30, 2011.
  (b) Plan.--Prior to any realignment or consolidation of the programs 
described in subsection (a), in addition to the Hispanic-Serving 
Institutions Undergraduate Program required by section 7033 of the 
America COMPETES Act (42 U.S.C. 1862o-12), the Director shall develop a 
plan clarifying the objectives and rationale for such changes. The plan 
shall include a description of how such changes would result in--
          (1) meeting or strengthening the common goal of the separate 
        programs to increase the number of individuals from 
        underrepresented groups attaining undergraduate STEM degrees; 
        and
          (2) addressing the unique needs of the different types of 
        minority serving institutions and underrepresented groups 
        currently provided for by the separate programs.
  (c) Recommendations.--In the development of the plan required under 
subsection (b), the Director shall at a minimum--
          (1) consider the recommendations and findings of the National 
        Academy of Sciences report required by section 7032 of the 
        America COMPETES Act (Public Law 110-69); and
          (2) solicit recommendations and feedback from a wide range of 
        stakeholders, including representatives from minority serving 
        institutions, other institutions of higher education, and other 
        entities with expertise on effective mechanisms to increase the 
        recruitment and retention of members of underrepresented groups 
        in STEM fields, and the attainment of STEM degrees by 
        underrepresented groups.
  (d) Approval by Congress.--The plan developed under this section 
shall be transmitted to Congress at least 3 months prior to the 
implementation of any realignment or consolidation of the programs 
described in subsection (a).

SEC. 251. GRAND CHALLENGES IN EDUCATION RESEARCH.

  (a) In General.--The Director and the Secretary of Education shall 
collaborate, in consultation with the Director of the National 
Institutes of Health, in--
          (1) identifying, prioritizing, and developing strategies to 
        address grand challenges in research and development on the 
        teaching and learning of STEM at the pre-K-12 level, in formal 
        and informal settings, for diverse learning populations, 
        including individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of the 
        Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 
        1885a or 1885b), and students in rural schools;
          (2) carrying out research and development to address the 
        grand challenges identified in paragraph (1); and
          (3) ensuring the dissemination of the results of such 
        research and development.
  (b) Stakeholder Input.--In identifying the grand challenges required 
in subsection (a), the Director and the Secretary shall--
          (1) take into consideration critical research gaps identified 
        in existing reports, including reports by the National 
        Academies, on the teaching and learning of STEM at the pre-K-12 
        level in formal and informal settings; and
          (2) solicit input from a wide range of stakeholders, 
        including local and State education officials, STEM teachers, 
        STEM education researchers, scientific and engineering 
        societies, STEM faculty at institutions of higher education, 
        informal STEM education providers, businesses with a large STEM 
        workforce, and other stakeholders in the teaching and learning 
        of STEM at the pre-K-12 level, and may enter into an 
        arrangement with the National Research Council for these 
        purposes.
  (c) Topics to Consider.--In identifying the grand challenges required 
in subsection (a), the Director and the Secretary, in order to provide 
students with increased access to rigorous courses of study in STEM, 
increase the number of students who are prepared for advanced study and 
careers in STEM, and increase the effective teaching of STEM subjects, 
shall at a minimum consider the following topics:
          (1) Research on scalability, sustainability, and replication 
        of successful STEM activities, programs, and models, in formal 
        and informal environments.
          (2) Research that utilizes a systems approach to identifying 
        challenges and opportunities to improve the teaching and 
        learning of STEM, including development and evaluation of model 
        systems that support improved teaching and learning of STEM 
        across entire school districts and States, and encompassing and 
        integrating the teaching and learning of STEM in formal and 
        informal venues, and in K-12 schools and institutions of higher 
        education.
          (3) Research to understand what makes a STEM teacher 
        effective and STEM teacher professional development effective, 
        including development of tools and methodologies to measure 
        STEM teacher effectiveness.
          (4) Research and development on cyber-enabled tools and 
        programs and television based tools and programs for learning 
        and teaching STEM, including development of tools and 
        methodologies for assessing cyber and television enabled 
        teaching and learning.
          (5) Research and development on STEM teaching and learning in 
        informal environments, including development of tools and 
        methodologies for assessing STEM teaching and learning in 
        informal environments.
          (6) Research and development on how integrating engineering 
        with mathematics and science education may--
                  (A) improve student learning of mathematics and 
                science;
                  (B) increase student interest and persistence in 
                STEM; or
                  (C) improve student understanding of engineering 
                design principles and of the built world.
          (7) Research to understand what makes hands-on, inquiry-based 
        classroom experiences effective, including development of tools 
        and methodologies for assessing such experiences.
  (d) Report to Congress.--Not later than 18 months after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Director and the Secretary shall report back 
to Congress with a description of--
          (1) the grand challenges identified pursuant to this section;
          (2) the role of each agency in supporting research and 
        development activities to address the grand challenges;
          (3) the common metrics that will be used to assess progress 
        toward meeting the grand challenges;
          (4) plans for periodically updating the grand challenges;
          (5) how the agencies will disseminate the results of research 
        and development activities carried out under this section to 
        STEM education practitioners, to other Federal agencies that 
        support STEM programs and activities, and to non-Federal 
        funders of STEM education; and
          (6) how the agencies will support implementation of best 
        practices identified by the research and development 
        activities.

SEC. 252. RESEARCH EXPERIENCES FOR UNDERGRADUATES.

  (a) Research Sites.--The Director shall award grants, on a merit-
reviewed, competitive basis, to institutions of higher education, 
nonprofit organizations, or consortia of such institutions and 
organizations, for sites designated by the Director to provide research 
experiences for 10 or more undergraduate STEM students, with 
consideration given to the goal of promoting the participation of 
individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of the Science and 
Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 1885b). The 
Director shall ensure that--
          (1) at least half of the students participating in a program 
        funded by a grant under this subsection at each site shall be 
        recruited from institutions of higher education where research 
        opportunities in STEM are limited, including 2-year 
        institutions;
          (2) the awards provide undergraduate research experiences in 
        a wide range of STEM disciplines;
          (3) the awards support a variety of projects, including 
        independent investigator-led projects, interdisciplinary 
        projects, and multi-institutional projects (including virtual 
        projects);
          (4) students participating in each program funded have 
        mentors, including during the academic year to the extent 
        practicable, to help connect the students' research experiences 
        to the overall academic course of study and to help students 
        achieve success in courses of study leading to a baccalaureate 
        degree in a STEM field;
          (5) mentors and students are supported with appropriate 
        salary or stipends; and
          (6) student participants are tracked, for employment and 
        continued matriculation in STEM fields, through receipt of the 
        undergraduate degree and for at least 3 years thereafter.
  (b) Inclusion of Undergraduates in Standard Research Grants.--The 
Director shall require that every recipient of a research grant from 
the Foundation proposing to include 1 or more undergraduate students in 
carrying out the research under the grant shall request support, 
including stipend support, for such undergraduate students as part of 
the research proposal itself rather than as a supplement to the 
research proposal, unless such undergraduate participation was not 
foreseeable at the time of the original proposal.

SEC. 253. LABORATORY SCIENCE PILOT PROGRAM.

  Section 7026 of the America COMPETES Act (Public Law 110-69) is 
amended by striking subsections (d) and (e).

SEC. 254. STEM INDUSTRY INTERNSHIP PROGRAMS.

  (a) In General.--The Director may award grants, on a competitive, 
merit-reviewed basis, to institutions of higher education, or consortia 
thereof, to establish or expand partnerships with local or regional 
private sector entities, for the purpose of providing undergraduate 
students with integrated internship experiences that connect private 
sector internship experiences with the students' STEM coursework. Such 
partnerships may also include industry or professional associations.
  (b) Priority.--In awarding grants under this section, the Director 
shall give priority to institutions of higher education or consortia 
thereof that demonstrate significant outreach to and coordination with 
local or regional private sector entities in developing academic 
courses designed to provide students with the skills necessary for 
employment in local or regional companies.
  (c) Cost-share.--The Director shall require a 50 percent non-Federal 
cost-share from partnerships established or expanded under this 
section.
  (d) Restriction.--No Federal funds provided under this section may be 
used--
          (1) for the purpose of providing stipends or compensation to 
        students for private sector internships; or
          (2) as payment or reimbursement to private sector entities.
  (e) Report.--Not less than 3 years after the date of enactment of 
this Act, the Director shall submit a report to Congress on the number 
and total value of awards made under this section, the number of 
students affected by those awards, and any evidence of the effect of 
those awards on workforce preparation and jobs placement for 
participating students.

SEC. 255. TRIBAL COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES PROGRAM.

  (a) In General.--The Director shall continue to support a program to 
award grants on a competitive, merit-reviewed basis to tribal colleges 
and universities (as defined in section 316 of the Higher Education Act 
of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059c)), including institutions described in section 
317 of such Act (20 U.S.C. 1059d), to enhance the quality of 
undergraduate STEM education at such institutions and to increase the 
retention and graduation rates of Native American students pursuing 
associate's or baccalaureate degrees in STEM.
  (b) Program Components.--Grants awarded under this section shall 
support--
          (1) activities to improve courses and curriculum in STEM;
          (2) faculty development;
          (3) stipends for undergraduate students participating in 
        research; and
          (4) other activities consistent with subsection (a), as 
        determined by the Director.
  (c) Instrumentation.--Funding provided under this section may be used 
for instrumentation.

                       TITLE III--STEM EDUCATION

SEC. 301. COORDINATION OF FEDERAL STEM EDUCATION.

  (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``STEM Education 
Coordination Act of 2010''.
  (b) Definition.--In this section, the term ``STEM'' means science, 
technology, engineering, and mathematics.
  (c) Establishment.--The Director of the Office of Science and 
Technology Policy shall establish a committee under the National 
Science and Technology Council with the responsibility to coordinate 
Federal programs and activities in support of STEM education, including 
at the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Education, and all other 
Federal agencies that have programs and activities in support of STEM 
education.
  (d) Responsibilities of the Committee.--The committee established 
under subsection (c) shall--
          (1) coordinate the STEM education activities and programs of 
        the Federal agencies;
          (2) develop, implement through the participating agencies, 
        and update once every 5 years a 5-year STEM education strategic 
        plan, which shall--
                  (A) specify and prioritize annual and long-term 
                objectives;
                  (B) specify the common metrics that will be used to 
                assess progress toward achieving the objectives;
                  (C) describe the approaches that will be taken by 
                each participating agency to assess the effectiveness 
                of its STEM education programs and activities; and
                  (D) with respect to subparagraph (A), describe the 
                role of each agency in supporting programs and 
                activities designed to achieve the objectives; and
          (3) establish, periodically update, and maintain an inventory 
        of federally sponsored STEM education programs and activities, 
        including documentation of assessments of the effectiveness of 
        such programs and activities and rates of participation by 
        underrepresented minorities in such programs and activities.
  (e) Responsibilities of OSTP.--The Director of the Office of Science 
and Technology Policy shall encourage and monitor the efforts of the 
participating agencies to ensure that the strategic plan under 
subsection (d)(2) is developed and executed effectively and that the 
objectives of the strategic plan are met.
  (f) Report.--The Director of the Office of Science and Technology 
Policy shall transmit a report annually to Congress at the time of the 
President's budget request describing the plan required under 
subsection (d)(2). The annual report shall include--
          (1) a description of the STEM education programs and 
        activities for the previous and current fiscal years, and the 
        proposed programs and activities under the President's budget 
        request, of each participating Federal agency;
          (2) the levels of funding for each participating Federal 
        agency for the programs and activities described under 
        paragraph (1) for the previous fiscal year and under the 
        President's budget request;
          (3) except for the initial annual report, a description of 
        the progress made in carrying out the implementation plan, 
        including a description of the outcome of any program 
        assessments completed in the previous year, and any changes 
        made to that plan since the previous annual report; and
          (4) a description of how the participating Federal agencies 
        will disseminate information about federally supported 
        resources for STEM education practitioners, including teacher 
        professional development programs, to States and to STEM 
        education practitioners, including to teachers and 
        administrators in high-need schools, as defined in section 200 
        of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1021).

SEC. 302. ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON STEM EDUCATION.

  (a) In General.--The President shall establish or designate an 
advisory committee on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 
(STEM) education.
  (b) Membership.--The advisory committee established or designated by 
the President under subsection (a) shall be chaired by at least 2 
members of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and 
Technology, with the remaining advisory committee membership consisting 
of non-Federal members who are specially qualified to provide the 
President with advice and information on STEM education. Membership of 
the advisory committee, at a minimum, shall include individuals from 
the following categories of individuals and organizations:
          (1) STEM educator professional associations.
          (2) Organizations that provide informal STEM education 
        activities.
          (3) Institutions of higher education.
          (4) Scientific and engineering professional societies.
          (5) Business and industry associations.
          (6) Foundations that fund STEM education activities.
  (c) Responsibilities.--The responsibilities of the advisory committee 
shall include--
          (1) soliciting input from teachers, administrators, local 
        education agencies, States, and other public and private STEM 
        education stakeholder groups for the purpose of informing the 
        Federal agencies that support STEM education programs on the 
        STEM education needs of States and school districts;
          (2) soliciting input from all STEM education stakeholder 
        groups regarding STEM education programs, including STEM 
        education research programs, supported by Federal agencies;
          (3) providing advice to the Federal agencies that support 
        STEM education programs on how their programs can be better 
        aligned with the needs of States and school districts as 
        identified in paragraph (1), consistent with the mission of 
        each agency; and
          (4) offering guidance to the President on current STEM 
        education activities, research findings, and best practices, 
        with the purpose of increasing connectivity between public and 
        private STEM education efforts.

SEC. 303. STEM EDUCATION AT THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY.

  (a) Definitions.--Section 5002 of the America COMPETES Act (42 U.S.C. 
16531) is amended--
          (1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (4) as paragraphs 
        (3) through (5), respectively; and
          (2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following new 
        paragraph:
          ``(2) Energy systems science and engineering.--The term 
        `energy systems science and engineering' means--
                  ``(A) nuclear science and engineering, including--
                          ``(i) nuclear engineering;
                          ``(ii) nuclear chemistry;
                          ``(iii) radiochemistry; and
                          ``(iv) health physics;
                  ``(B) hydrocarbon system science and engineering, 
                including--
                          ``(i) petroleum or reservoir engineering;
                          ``(ii) environmental geoscience;
                          ``(iii) petrophysics;
                          ``(iv) geophysics;
                          ``(v) geochemistry;
                          ``(vi) petroleum geology;
                          ``(vii) ocean engineering;
                          ``(viii) environmental engineering; and
                          ``(ix) carbon capture and sequestration 
                        science and engineering;
                  ``(C) energy efficiency and renewable energy 
                technology systems science and engineering, including 
                with respect to--
                          ``(i) solar technology systems;
                          ``(ii) wind technology systems;
                          ``(iii) buildings technology systems;
                          ``(iv) transportation technology systems;
                          ``(v) hydropower systems; and
                          ``(vi) geothermal systems; and
                  ``(D) energy storage and distribution systems science 
                and engineering, including with respect to--
                          ``(i) energy storage; and
                          ``(ii) energy delivery.''.
  (b) Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education 
Programs.--Subpart B of the Department of Energy Science Education 
Enhancement Act (42 U.S.C. 7381g et seq.) is amended--
          (1) in section 3170--
                  (A) by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows:
          ``(1) Director.--The term `Director' means the Director of 
        STEM Education appointed or designated under section 
        3171(c)(1).'';
                  (B) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3);
                  (C) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following 
                new paragraph:
          ``(2) Energy systems science and engineering.--The term 
        `energy systems science and engineering' means--
                  ``(A) nuclear science and engineering, including--
                          ``(i) nuclear engineering;
                          ``(ii) nuclear chemistry;
                          ``(iii) radiochemistry; and
                          ``(iv) health physics;
                  ``(B) hydrocarbon system science and engineering, 
                including--
                          ``(i) petroleum or reservoir engineering;
                          ``(ii) environmental geoscience;
                          ``(iii) petrophysics;
                          ``(iv) geophysics;
                          ``(v) geochemistry;
                          ``(vi) petroleum geology;
                          ``(vii) ocean engineering; and
                          ``(viii) environmental engineering;
                  ``(C) energy efficiency and renewable energy 
                technology systems science and engineering, including 
                with respect to--
                          ``(i) solar technology systems;
                          ``(ii) wind technology systems;
                          ``(iii) buildings technology systems;
                          ``(iv) transportation technology systems;
                          ``(v) hydropower systems; and
                          ``(vi) geothermal systems; and
                  ``(D) energy storage and distribution systems science 
                and engineering, including with respect to--
                          ``(i) energy storage; and
                          ``(ii) energy delivery.''; and
                  (D) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
          ``(4) STEM.--The term `STEM' means science, technology, 
        engineering, and mathematics.'';
          (2) by striking chapters 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6;
          (3) by inserting after section 3170 the following new 
        chapter:

                      ``CHAPTER 1--STEM EDUCATION

``SEC. 3171. STEM EDUCATION.

  ``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy shall develop, conduct, 
support, promote, and coordinate formal and informal educational 
activities that leverage the Department's unique content expertise and 
facilities to contribute to improving STEM education at all levels in 
the United States, and to enhance awareness and understanding of STEM, 
including energy sciences, in order to create a diverse skilled 
scientific and technical workforce essential to meeting the challenges 
facing the Department and the Nation in the 21st century.
  ``(b) Programs.--The Secretary shall carry out evidence-based 
programs designed to increase student interest and participation, 
improve public literacy and support, and improve the teaching and 
learning of energy systems science and engineering and other STEM 
disciplines supported by the Department. Programs authorized under this 
subsection may include--
          ``(1) informal educational programming designed to excite and 
        inspire students and the general public about energy systems 
        science and engineering and other STEM disciplines supported by 
        the Department, while strengthening their content knowledge in 
        these fields;
          ``(2) teacher training and professional development 
        opportunities for pre-service and in-service elementary and 
        secondary teachers designed to increase the content knowledge 
        of teachers in energy systems science and engineering and other 
        STEM disciplines supported by the Department, including through 
        hands-on research experiences;
          ``(3) research opportunities for secondary school students, 
        including internships at the National Laboratories, that 
        provide secondary school students with hands-on research 
        experiences as well as exposure to working scientists;
          ``(4) research opportunities at the National Laboratories for 
        undergraduate and graduate students pursuing degrees in energy 
        systems science and engineering and other STEM disciplines 
        supported by the Department; and
          ``(5) competitive scholarships, fellowships, and traineeships 
        for undergraduate and graduate students in energy systems 
        science and engineering and other STEM disciplines supported by 
        the Department.
  ``(c) Organization of STEM Education Programs.--
          ``(1) Director of stem education.--The Secretary shall 
        appoint or designate a Director of STEM Education, who shall 
        have the principal responsibility to oversee and coordinate all 
        programs and activities of the Department in support of STEM 
        education, including energy systems science and engineering 
        education, across all functions of the Department.
          ``(2) Qualifications.--The Director shall be an individual, 
        who by reason of professional background and experience, is 
        specially qualified to advise the Secretary on all matters 
        pertaining to STEM education, including energy systems science 
        and engineering education, at the Department.
          ``(3) Duties.--The Director shall--
                  ``(A) oversee and coordinate all programs in support 
                of STEM education, including energy systems science and 
                engineering education, across all functions of the 
                Department;
                  ``(B) represent the Department as the principal 
                interagency liaison for all STEM education programs, 
                unless otherwise represented by the Secretary, the 
                Under Secretary for Science, or the Under Secretary for 
                Energy;
                  ``(C) prepare the annual budget and advise the Under 
                Secretary for Science and the Under Secretary for 
                Energy on all budgetary issues for STEM education, 
                including energy systems science and engineering 
                education, relative to the programs of the Department;
                  ``(D) establish, periodically update, and maintain a 
                publicly accessible online inventory of STEM education 
                programs and activities, including energy systems 
                science and engineering education programs and 
                activities;
                  ``(E) develop, implement, and update the Department 
                of Energy STEM education strategic plan, as required by 
                subsection (d);
                  ``(F) increase, to the maximum extent practicable, 
                the participation and advancement of women and 
                underrepresented minorities at every level of STEM 
                education, including energy systems science and 
                engineering education; and
                  ``(G) perform such other matters relating to STEM 
                education as are required by the Secretary, the Under 
                Secretary for Science, or the Under Secretary for 
                Energy.
  ``(d) Department of Energy Stem Education Strategic Plan.--The 
Director of STEM education appointed or designated under subsection 
(c)(1) shall develop, implement, and update once every 3 years a 3-year 
STEM education strategic plan for the Department, which shall--
          ``(1) identify and prioritize annual and long-term STEM 
        education goals and objectives for the Department that are 
        aligned with the overall goals of the National Science and 
        Technology Council Committee on STEM Education Strategic plan 
        required under section 301(d)(2) of the STEM Education 
        Coordination Act of 2010;
          ``(2) describe the role of each program or activity of the 
        Department in contributing to the goals and objectives 
        identified under paragraph (1);
          ``(3) specify the metrics that will be used to assess 
        progress toward achieving those goals and objectives; and
          ``(4) describe the approaches that will be taken to assess 
        the effectiveness of each STEM education program and activity 
        supported by the Department.
  ``(e) Outreach to Students From Underrepresented Groups.--In carrying 
out a program authorized under this section, the Secretary shall give 
consideration to the goal of promoting the participation of individuals 
identified in section 33 or 34 of the Science and Engineering Equal 
Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 1885b).
  ``(f) Consultation and Partnership With Other Agencies.--In carrying 
out the programs and activities authorized under this section, the 
Secretary shall--
          ``(1) consult with the Secretary of Education and the 
        Director of the National Science Foundation regarding 
        activities designed to improve elementary and secondary STEM 
        education; and
          ``(2) consult and partner with the Director of the National 
        Science Foundation in carrying out programs under this section 
        designed to build capacity in STEM education at the 
        undergraduate and graduate level, including by supporting 
        excellent proposals in energy systems science and engineering 
        that are submitted for funding to the Foundation's Advanced 
        Technological Education Program.''; and
          (4) in section 3191--
                  (A) in subsection (a)--
                          (i) by striking ``web-based'' and inserting 
                        ``, through a publicly available website,'' ; 
                        and
                          (ii) by inserting ``and project-based 
                        learning opportunities'' after ``laboratory 
                        experiments'';
                  (B) in subsection (b)(1), by inserting ``, including 
                energy systems science and engineering'' after ``the 
                science of energy''; and
                  (C) by striking subsection (d).
  (c) Energy Applied Science Talent Expansion Program for Institutions 
of Higher Education.--
          (1) Amendment.--Strike sections 5004 and 5005 of the America 
        COMPETES Act (42 U.S.C. 16532 and 16533) and insert the 
        following new section:

``SEC. 5004. ENERGY APPLIED SCIENCE TALENT EXPANSION PROGRAM FOR 
                    INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION.

  ``(a) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
          ``(1) to address the decline in the number of and resources 
        available to energy systems science and engineering programs at 
        institutions of higher education, including community colleges; 
        and
          ``(2) to increase the number of graduates with degrees in 
        energy systems science and engineering, an area of strategic 
        importance to the economic competitiveness and energy security 
        of the United States.
  ``(b) Establishment.--The Secretary shall award grants, on a 
competitive, merit-reviewed basis, to institutions of higher education 
to implement or expand the energy systems science and engineering 
educational and technical training capabilities of the institution, and 
to provide merit-based financial support for master's and doctoral 
level students pursuing courses of study and research in energy systems 
sciences and engineering.
  ``(c) Use of Funds.--An institution of higher education that receives 
a grant under this section may use the grant to--
          ``(1) provide traineeships, including stipends and cost of 
        education allowances, to master's and doctoral students;
          ``(2) develop or expand multidisciplinary or 
        interdisciplinary courses or programs;
          ``(3) recruit and retain new faculty;
          ``(4) develop or improve core and specialized course content;
          ``(5) encourage interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary 
        research collaborations;
          ``(6) support outreach efforts to recruit students, including 
        individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of the Science and 
        Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 1885b); 
        and
          ``(7) pursue opportunities for collaboration with industry 
        and National Laboratories.
  ``(d) Criteria.--Criteria for awarding a grant under this section 
shall be based on--
          ``(1) the potential to attract new students to the program;
          ``(2) academic rigor; and
          ``(3) the ability to offer hands-on education and training 
        opportunities for graduate students in the emerging areas of 
        energy systems science and engineering.
  ``(e) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority to proposals that 
involve active partnerships with a National Laboratory or other energy 
systems science and engineering related entity, as determined by the 
Secretary.
  ``(f) Duration and Amount.--
          ``(1) Duration.--A grant under this section may be for up to 
        5 years in duration.
          ``(2) Amount.--An institution of higher education that 
        receives a grant under this section shall be eligible for up to 
        $1,000,000 for each year of the grant period.
  ``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be 
appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section--
          ``(1) $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
          ``(2) $32,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
          ``(3) $36,000,000 for fiscal year 2013;
          ``(4) $38,000,000 for fiscal year 2014; and
          ``(5) $40,000,000 for fiscal year 2015.''.
          (2) Conforming amendment.--The table of contents for the 
        America COMPETES Act is amended by striking the items relating 
        to sections 5004 and 5005 and inserting the following:

Sec. 5004. Energy applied science talent expansion program for 
institutions of higher education.
  (d) Department of Energy Early Career Awards for Science, 
Engineering, and Mathematics Researchers.--Section 5006 of the America 
COMPETES Act (42 U.S.C. 16534) is amended--
          (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``Director of the Office'' 
        and all that follows through ``shall carry'' and inserting 
        ``Secretary shall carry'';
          (2) in subsection (b)(1)--
                  (A) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``per year'' 
                after ``$80,000''; and
                  (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``$125,000'' and 
                inserting ``$175,000 per year'';
          (3) in subsection (c)(1), by striking ``, as determined by 
        the Director'';
          (4) in subsections (c)(2), (e), (f), and (g), by striking 
        ``Director'' each place it appears and inserting ``Secretary'';
          (5) in subsection (d), by striking ``merit-reviewed'' and 
        inserting ``merit-based, peer reviewed''; and
          (6) in subsection (h)--
                  (A) by striking ``, acting through the Director,''; 
                and
                  (B) by striking ``$25,000,000 for each of fiscal 
                years 2008 through 2010'' and inserting ``such sums as 
                are necessary''.
  (e) Protecting America's Competitive Edge (PACE) Graduate Fellowship 
Program.--Section 5009 of the America COMPETES Act (42 U.S.C. 16536) is 
amended--
          (1) in subsection (c)--
                  (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``involving written 
                and oral interviews, that will result in a wide 
                distribution of awards throughout the United States,''; 
                and
                  (B) in paragraph (2)(B)(iv), by striking ``verbal 
                and'';
          (2) in subsection (d)(1)(B)(i), by inserting ``partial or 
        full'' before ``graduate tuition''; and
          (3) by striking subsection (f).
  (f) Repeal.--Section 3164 of the Department of Energy Science 
Education Enhancement Act (42 U.S.C. 7381a) is repealed.

SEC. 304. GREEN ENERGY EDUCATION.

  (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Green Energy 
Education Act of 2010''.
  (b) Definition.--For the purposes of this section:
          (1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of 
        the National Science Foundation.
          (2) High performance building.--The term ``high performance 
        building'' has the meaning given that term in section 914(a) of 
        the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 16194(a)).
  (c) Graduate Training in Energy Research and Development.--
          (1) Funding.--In carrying out research, development, 
        demonstration, and commercial application activities authorized 
        for the Department of Energy, the Secretary may contribute 
        funds to the National Science Foundation for the Integrative 
        Graduate Education and Research Traineeship program to support 
        projects that enable graduate education related to such 
        activities.
          (2) Consultation.--The Director shall consult with the 
        Secretary when preparing solicitations and awarding grants for 
        projects described in paragraph (1).
  (d) Curriculum Development for High Performance Building Design.--
          (1) Funding.--In carrying out advanced energy technology 
        research, development, demonstration, and commercial 
        application activities authorized for the Department of Energy 
        related to high performance buildings, the Secretary may 
        contribute funds to curriculum development activities at the 
        National Science Foundation for the purpose of improving 
        undergraduate or graduate interdisciplinary engineering and 
        architecture education related to the design and construction 
        of high performance buildings, including development of 
        curricula, of laboratory activities, of training practicums, or 
        of design projects. A primary goal of curriculum development 
        activities supported under this subsection shall be to improve 
        the ability of engineers, architects, landscape architects, and 
        planners to work together on the incorporation of advanced 
        energy technologies during the design and construction of high 
        performance buildings.
          (2) Consultation.--The Director shall consult with the 
        Secretary when preparing solicitations and awarding grants for 
        projects described in paragraph (1).
          (3) Priority.--In awarding grants with respect to which the 
        Secretary has contributed funds under this subsection, the 
        Director shall give priority to applications from departments, 
        programs, or centers of a school of engineering that are 
        partnered with schools, departments, or programs of design, 
        architecture, landscape architecture, and city, regional, or 
        urban planning.

        TITLE IV--NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY

SEC. 401. SHORT TITLE.

  This title may be cited as the ``National Institute of Standards and 
Technology Authorization Act of 2010''.

SEC. 402. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

  (a) Fiscal Year 2011.--
          (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        the Secretary of Commerce $991,100,000 for the National 
        Institute of Standards and Technology for fiscal year 2011.
          (2) Specific allocations.--Of the amount authorized under 
        paragraph (1)--
                  (A) $620,000,000 shall be authorized for scientific 
                and technical research and services laboratory 
                activities;
                  (B) $125,000,000 shall be authorized for the 
                construction and maintenance of facilities; and
                  (C) $246,100,000 shall be authorized for industrial 
                technology services activities, of which--
                          (i) $95,000,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Technology Innovation Program under section 28 
                        of the National Institute of Standards and 
                        Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278n);
                          (ii) $141,100,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Manufacturing Extension Partnership program 
                        under sections 25 and 26 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 
                        278k and 278l); and
                          (iii) $10,000,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award program 
                        under section 17 of the Stevenson-Wydler 
                        Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 
                        3711a).
  (b) Fiscal Year 2012.--
          (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        the Secretary of Commerce $992,400,000 for the National 
        Institute of Standards and Technology for fiscal year 2012.
          (2) Specific allocations.--Of the amount authorized under 
        paragraph (1)--
                  (A) $657,200,000 shall be authorized for scientific 
                and technical research and services laboratory 
                activities;
                  (B) $85,000,000 shall be authorized for the 
                construction and maintenance of facilities; and
                  (C) $250,200,000 shall be authorized for industrial 
                technology services activities, of which--
                          (i) $89,000,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Technology Innovation Program under section 28 
                        of the National Institute of Standards and 
                        Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278n);
                          (ii) $150,900,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Manufacturing Extension Partnership program 
                        under sections 25 and 26 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 
                        278k and 278l); and
                          (iii) $10,300,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award program 
                        under section 17 of the Stevenson-Wydler 
                        Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 
                        3711a).
  (c) Fiscal Year 2013.--
          (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        the Secretary of Commerce $1,079,809,000 for the National 
        Institute of Standards and Technology for fiscal year 2013.
          (2) Specific allocations.--Of the amount authorized under 
        paragraph (1)--
                  (A) $696,700,000 shall be authorized for scientific 
                and technical research and services laboratory 
                activities;
                  (B) $122,000,000 shall be authorized for the 
                construction and maintenance of facilities; and
                  (C) $261,109,000 shall be authorized for industrial 
                technology services activities, of which--
                          (i) $89,000,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Technology Innovation Program under section 28 
                        of the National Institute of Standards and 
                        Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278n);
                          (ii) $161,500,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Manufacturing Extension Partnership program 
                        under sections 25 and 26 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 
                        278k and 278l); and
                          (iii) $10,609,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award program 
                        under section 17 of the Stevenson-Wydler 
                        Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 
                        3711a).
  (d) Fiscal Year 2014.--
          (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        the Secretary of Commerce $1,126,227,000 for the National 
        Institute of Standards and Technology for fiscal year 2014.
          (2) Specific allocations.--Of the amount authorized under 
        paragraph (1)--
                  (A) $738,500,000 shall be authorized for scientific 
                and technical research and services laboratory 
                activities;
                  (B) $124,000,000 shall be authorized for the 
                construction and maintenance of facilities; and
                  (C) $263,727,000 shall be authorized for industrial 
                technology services activities, of which--
                          (i) $80,000,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Technology Innovation Program under section 28 
                        of the National Institute of Standards and 
                        Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278n);
                          (ii) $172,800,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Manufacturing Extension Partnership program 
                        under sections 25 and 26 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 
                        278k and 278l); and
                          (iii) $10,927,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award program 
                        under section 17 of the Stevenson-Wydler 
                        Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 
                        3711a).
  (e) Fiscal Year 2015.--
          (1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
        the Secretary of Commerce $1,191,955,000 for the National 
        Institute of Standards and Technology for fiscal year 2015.
          (2) Specific allocations.--Of the amount authorized under 
        paragraph (1)--
                  (A) $782,800,000 shall be authorized for scientific 
                and technical research and services laboratory 
                activities;
                  (B) $133,000,000 shall be authorized for the 
                construction and maintenance of facilities; and
                  (C) $276,155,000 shall be authorized for industrial 
                technology services activities, of which--
                          (i) $80,000,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Technology Innovation Program under section 28 
                        of the National Institute of Standards and 
                        Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278n);
                          (ii) $184,900,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Manufacturing Extension Partnership program 
                        under sections 25 and 26 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 
                        278k and 278l); and
                          (iii) $11,255,000 shall be authorized for the 
                        Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award program 
                        under section 17 of the Stevenson-Wydler 
                        Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 
                        3711a).

SEC. 403. UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY.

  (a) Establishment.--Section 4 of the National Institute of Standards 
and Technology Act is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 4. UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY.

  ``(a) Establishment.--There shall be in the Department of Commerce an 
Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology (in this 
section referred to as the `Under Secretary').
  ``(b) Appointment.--The Under Secretary shall be appointed by the 
President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
  ``(c) Compensation.--The Under Secretary shall be compensated at the 
rate in effect for level III of the Executive Schedule under section 
5314 of title 5, United States Code.
  ``(d) Duties.--The Under Secretary shall serve as the Director of the 
Institute and shall perform such duties as required of the Director by 
the Secretary under this Act or by law.
  ``(e) Applicability.--The individual serving as the Director of the 
Institute on the date of enactment of the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology Authorization Act of 2010 shall also serve as 
the Under Secretary until such time as a successor is appointed under 
subsection (b).''.
  (b) Conforming Amendments.--
          (1) Title 5, united states code.--
                  (A) Level iii.--Section 5314 of title 5, United 
                States Code, is amended by inserting before the item 
                ``Associate Attorney General'' the following:
          ``Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology, 
        who also serves as Director of the National Institute of 
        Standards and Technology.''.
                  (B) Level iv.--Section 5315 of title 5, United States 
                Code, is amended by striking ``Director, National 
                Institute of Standards and Technology, Department of 
                Commerce.''.
          (2) National institute of standards and technology act.--
        Section 5 of the National Institute of Standards and Technology 
        Act (15 U.S.C. 274) is amended by striking the first, fifth, 
        and sixth sentences.

SEC. 404. REORGANIZATION OF NIST LABORATORIES.

  (a) Organization.--The Director shall reorganize the scientific and 
technical research and services laboratory program into the following 
operational units:
          (1) The Physical Measurement Laboratory, whose mission is to 
        realize and disseminate the national standards for length, 
        mass, time and frequency, electricity, temperature, force, and 
        radiation by activities including fundamental research in 
        measurement science, the provision of measurement services and 
        standards, and the provision of testing facilities resources 
        for use by the Federal Government.
          (2) The Information Technology Laboratory, whose mission is 
        to develop and disseminate standards, measurements, and testing 
        capabilities for interoperability, security, usability, and 
        reliability of information technologies, including cyber 
        security standards and guidelines for Federal agencies, United 
        States industry, and the public, through fundamental and 
        applied research in computer science, mathematics, and 
        statistics.
          (3) The Engineering Laboratory, whose mission is to develop 
        and disseminate advanced manufacturing and construction 
        technologies to the United States manufacturing and 
        construction industries through activities including 
        measurement science research, performance metrics, tools for 
        engineering applications, and promotion of standards adoption.
          (4) The Material Measurement Laboratory, whose mission is to 
        serve as the national reference laboratory in biological, 
        chemical, and material sciences and engineering through 
        activities including fundamental research in the composition, 
        structure, and properties of biological and environmental 
        materials and processes, the development of certified reference 
        materials and critically evaluated data, and other programs to 
        assure measurement quality in materials and biotechnology 
        fields.
          (5) The Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology, a 
        national shared-use facility for nanoscale fabrication and 
        measurement, whose mission is to develop innovative nanoscale 
        measurement and fabrication capabilities to support researchers 
        from industry, institutions of higher education, the National 
        Institute of Standards and Technology, and other Federal 
        agencies in nanoscale technology from discovery to production.
          (6) The NIST Center for Neutron Research, a national user 
        facility, whose mission is to provide neutron-based measurement 
        capabilities to researchers from industry, institutions of 
        higher education, the National Institute of Standards and 
        Technology, and other Federal agencies in support of materials 
        research, nondestructive evaluation, neutron imaging, chemical 
        analysis, neutron standards, dosimetry, and radiation 
        metrology.
  (b) Additional Duties.--The Director may assign additional duties to 
the operational units listed in subsection (a) that are consistent with 
the missions of such units.
  (c) Revision.--
          (1) In general.--Subsequent to the reorganization required 
        under subsection (a), the Director may revise the organization 
        of the scientific and technical research and services 
        laboratory program.
          (2) Report to congress.--Any revision to the organization of 
        such program under paragraph (1) shall be submitted in a report 
        to the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of 
        Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
        Transportation of the Senate at least 60 days before the 
        effective date of such revision.

SEC. 405. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT STANDARDS AND CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT 
                    COORDINATION.

  (a) Coordination.--Section 2(b) of the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 272(b)) is amended--
          (1) in paragraph (12), by striking ``and'' after the 
        semicolon;
          (2) in paragraph (13), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting a semicolon; and
          (3) by adding after paragraph (13) the following:
          ``(14) to promote collaboration among Federal departments and 
        agencies and private sector stakeholders in the development and 
        implementation of standards and conformity assessment 
        frameworks to address specific Federal Government policy goals; 
        and
          ``(15) to convene Federal departments and agencies, as 
        appropriate, to--
                  ``(A) coordinate and determine Federal Government 
                positions on specific policy issues related to the 
                development of international technical standards and 
                conformity assessment-related activities; and
                  ``(B) coordinate Federal department and agency 
                engagement in the development of international 
                technical standards and conformity assessment-related 
                activities.''.
  (b) Report.--The Director, in consultation with appropriate Federal 
agencies, shall submit a report annually to Congress addressing the 
Federal Government's technical standards and conformity assessment-
related activities. The report shall identify--
          (1) current and anticipated international standards and 
        conformity assessment-related issues that have the potential to 
        impact the competitiveness and innovation capabilities of the 
        United States;
          (2) any action being taken by the Federal Government to 
        address these issues and the Federal agency taking that action; 
        and
          (3) any action that the Director is taking or will take to 
        ensure effective Federal Government engagement on technical 
        standards and conformity assessment-related issues, as 
        appropriate, where the Federal Government is not effectively 
        engaged.

SEC. 406. MANUFACTURING EXTENSION PARTNERSHIP.

  (a) Community College Support.--Section 25(a) of the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278k(a)) is 
amended--
          (1) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and'' after the 
        semicolon;
          (2) in paragraph (5), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting ``; and''; and
          (3) by adding after paragraph (5) the following:
          ``(6) providing to community colleges information about the 
        job skills needed in small- and medium-sized manufacturing 
        businesses in the regions they serve.''.
  (b) Innovative Services Initiative.--Section 25 of such Act (15 
U.S.C. 278k) is amended by adding at the end the following:
  ``(g) Innovative Services Initiative.--
          ``(1) Establishment.--The Director may establish, within the 
        Centers program under this section, an innovative services 
        initiative to assist small- and medium-sized manufacturers in--
                  ``(A) reducing their energy usage and environmental 
                waste to improve profitability; and
                  ``(B) accelerating the domestic commercialization of 
                new product technologies, including components for 
                renewable energy systems.
          ``(2) Market demand.--The Director may not undertake any 
        activity to accelerate the domestic commercialization of a new 
        product technology under this subsection unless an analysis of 
        market demand for the new product technology has been 
        conducted.''.
  (c) Reports.--Section 25 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 278k) is further 
amended by adding after subsection (g), as added by subsection (b), the 
following:
  ``(h) Reports.--
          ``(1) In general.--In submitting the 3-year programmatic 
        planning document and annual updates under section 23, the 
        Director shall include an assessment of the Director's 
        governance of the program established under this section.
          ``(2) Criteria.--In conducting such assessment, the Director 
        shall use the criteria established pursuant to the Malcolm 
        Baldrige National Quality Award under section 17(d)(1)(C) of 
        the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 
        U.S.C. 3711a(d)(1)(C)).''.
  (d) Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program Cost-
Sharing.--Section 25(c) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 278k(c)) is amended by 
adding at the end the following:
          ``(7) Notwithstanding paragraphs (1), (3), and (5), for 
        fiscal year 2011 through fiscal year 2015, the Secretary may 
        not provide to a Center more than 50 percent of the costs 
        incurred by such Center and may not require that a Center's 
        cost share exceed 50 percent.
          ``(8) Not later than 4 years after the date of enactment of 
        the National Institute of Standards and Technology 
        Authorization Act of 2010, the Secretary shall submit to 
        Congress a report on the cost share requirements under the 
        program. The report shall--
                  ``(A) discuss various cost share structures, 
                including the cost share structure in place prior to 
                such date of enactment and the cost share structure in 
                place under paragraph (7), and the effect of such cost 
                share structures on individual Centers and the overall 
                program; and
                  ``(B) include a recommendation for how best to 
                structure the cost share requirement after fiscal year 
                2015 to provide for the long-term sustainability of the 
                program.''.
  (e) Advisory Board.--Section 25(e)(4) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 
278k(e)(4)) is amended to read as follows:
          ``(4) Federal advisory committee act applicability.--
                  ``(A) In general.--In discharging its duties under 
                this subsection, the MEP Advisory Board shall function 
                solely in an advisory capacity, in accordance with the 
                Federal Advisory Committee Act.
                  ``(B) Exception.--Section 14 of the Federal Advisory 
                Committee Act shall not apply to the MEP Advisory 
                Board.''.
  (f) Definitions.--Section 25 of such Act (15 U.S.C. 278k) is further 
amended by adding after subsection (h), as added by subsection (c), the 
following:
  ``(i) Definition.--In this section, the term `community college' 
means an institution of higher education (as defined under section 
101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a))) at 
which the highest degree that is predominately awarded to students is 
an associate's degree.''.

SEC. 407. BIOSCIENCE RESEARCH PROGRAM.

  (a) In General.--The National Institute of Standards and Technology 
Act (15 U.S.C. 271 et seq.) is amended--
          (1) by redesignating section 34 as section 35; and
          (2) by inserting after section 33 the following:

``SEC. 34. BIOSCIENCE RESEARCH PROGRAM.

  ``(a) In General.--The Director shall establish a bioscience research 
program to support research and development of standard reference 
materials, measurements, methods, and genomic and other data to 
advance--
          ``(1) biological drug research and development;
          ``(2) molecular diagnostics;
          ``(3) medical imaging technologies; and
          ``(4) personalized medicine.
  ``(b) University Research Centers.--
          ``(1) Establishment.--The Director may establish research 
        centers at institutions of higher education (in this section 
        referred to as `university research centers') through a 
        competitive application process to conduct research that 
        furthers the objectives of the bioscience research program.
          ``(2) Application.--
                  ``(A) In general.--An institution of higher education 
                seeking to establish a university research center under 
                this subsection shall submit an application to the 
                Director at such time, in such manner, and containing 
                such information and assurances as the Director may 
                require.
                  ``(B) Components.--The application shall include, at 
                a minimum, a description of--
                          ``(i) the relevant research and instructional 
                        capacity of the applicant;
                          ``(ii) the research projects that will be 
                        undertaken by the applicant;
                          ``(iii) the extent to which the applicant 
                        will partner with industry and the role 
                        industry will play in the research undertaken 
                        by the university research center;
                          ``(iv) how the applicant will disseminate 
                        research results effectively; and
                          ``(v) the metrics that will be used to 
                        evaluate the success of the projects under 
                        clause (ii) and the contribution of the 
                        university research center in furthering the 
                        objectives of the bioscience research program.
                  ``(C) Special consideration.--The Director shall give 
                special consideration to an application from an 
                institution of higher education that is--
                          ``(i) an 1890 Institution, as defined in 
                        section 2 of the Agricultural Research, 
                        Extension, and Education Reform Act of 1998 (7 
                        U.S.C. 7061);
                          ``(ii) a Predominantly Black Institution, as 
                        defined in section 318 of the Higher Education 
                        Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059e);
                          ``(iii) a part B institution, as defined in 
                        section 322 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 
                        (20 U.S.C. 1061);
                          ``(iv) a Tribal College or University, as 
                        defined in section 316 of the Higher Education 
                        Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059c);
                          ``(v) a Native American-serving, nontribal 
                        institution, as defined in section 319 of the 
                        Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059f);
                          ``(vi) an Asian American and Native American 
                        Pacific Islander-serving institution, as 
                        defined in section 320 of the Higher Education 
                        Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059g);
                          ``(vii) an Alaska Native-serving institution, 
                        as defined in section 317 of the Higher 
                        Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059d);
                          ``(viii) a Native Hawaiian-serving 
                        institution, as defined in section 317 of the 
                        Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059d); 
                        or
                          ``(ix) a Hispanic-serving institution, as 
                        defined in section 502 of the Higher Education 
                        Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1101a).
          ``(3) Assessment.--Not later than 3 years after the date on 
        which a university research center is established and every 3 
        years thereafter, the Director shall evaluate the university 
        research center for its contributions to the bioscience 
        research program.
          ``(4) Annual meeting.--If the Director establishes more than 
        1 university research center, the Director shall convene an 
        annual meeting of researchers from all of the university 
        research centers and the Institute to foster collaboration and 
        communication.
  ``(c) User Facility.--The Director may establish a bioscience user 
facility to provide access to advanced or unique equipment, services, 
materials, and other resources to industry, institutions of higher 
education, nonprofit organizations, and government agencies to perform 
research and testing.
  ``(d) Postdoctoral Fellows.--The Director shall, to the extent 
practicable, assign 1 or more fellows from the postdoctoral fellowship 
program established in section 19 to the bioscience research program.
  ``(e) Programmatic Planning Document.--The Director shall ensure that 
the updates to the programmatic planning document transmitted to 
Congress under section 23(d) include the bioscience research program.
  ``(f) Definitions.--In this section:
          ``(1) Bioscience research program.--The term `bioscience 
        research program' means the research and development program 
        authorized under subsection (a).
          ``(2) Institution of higher education.--The term `institution 
        of higher education' has the same meaning given the term in 
        section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
        1001(a)).''.
  (b) Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology Amendments.--Section 10 
of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 
278) is amended--
          (1) in subsection (a)--
                  (A) by striking ``15 members'' and inserting ``at 
                least 15, but not more than 20, members''; and
                  (B) by striking ``at least 10'' and inserting ``at 
                least 13''; and
          (2) in subsection (h)(1), by striking ``Program established 
        under section 28'' and inserting ``programs established under 
        sections 28 and 34''.

SEC. 408. EMERGENCY COMMUNICATION AND TRACKING TECHNOLOGIES RESEARCH 
                    INITIATIVE.

  (a) Establishment.--The Director shall establish a research 
initiative to support the development of emergency communication and 
tracking technologies for use in locating trapped individuals in 
confined spaces, such as underground mines, and other shielded 
environments, such as high-rise buildings or collapsed structures, 
where conventional radio communication is limited.
  (b) Activities.--In order to carry out this section, the Director 
shall work with the private sector and appropriate Federal agencies 
to--
          (1) perform a needs assessment to identify and evaluate the 
        measurement, technical standards, and conformity assessment 
        needs required to improve the operation and reliability of such 
        emergency communication and tracking technologies; and
          (2) support the development of technical standards and 
        conformance architecture to improve the operation and 
        reliability of such emergency communication and tracking 
        technologies.
  (c) Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of 
this Act, the Director shall submit to Congress and make publicly 
available a report describing the assessment performed under subsection 
(b)(1) and making recommendations about research priorities to address 
gaps in the measurement, technical standards, and conformity assessment 
needs identified by such assessment.

SEC. 409. TIP ADVISORY BOARD.

  Section 28(k)(4) of the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278n(k)(4)) is amended to read as follows:
          ``(4) Federal advisory committee act applicability.--
                  ``(A) In general.--In discharging its duties under 
                this subsection, the TIP Advisory Board shall function 
                solely in an advisory capacity, in accordance with the 
                Federal Advisory Committee Act.
                  ``(B) Exception.--Section 14 of the Federal Advisory 
                Committee Act shall not apply to the TIP Advisory 
                Board.''.

SEC. 410. UNDERREPRESENTED MINORITIES.

  (a) Research Fellowships.--Section 18 of the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-1) is amended by adding at 
the end the following:
  ``(c) Underrepresented Minorities.--In evaluating applications for 
fellowships under this section, the Director shall give consideration 
to the goal of promoting the participation of underrepresented 
minorities in research areas supported by the Institute.''.
  (b) Postdoctoral Fellowship Program.--Section 19 of such Act (15 
U.S.C. 278g-2) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``In 
evaluating applications for fellowships under this section, the 
Director shall give consideration to the goal of promoting the 
participation of underrepresented minorities in research areas 
supported by the Institute.''.
  (c) Teacher Development.--Section 19A(c) of such Act (15 U.S.C. 278g-
2a(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following: ``The Director 
shall give special consideration to an application from a teacher from 
a high-need school, as defined in section 200 of the Higher Education 
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1021).''.

SEC. 411. CYBER SECURITY STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES.

  Cyber security standards and guidelines developed by the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology for use by United States industry 
and the public shall be voluntary.

SEC. 412. DEFINITIONS.

  In this title:
          (1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of 
        the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
          (2) Federal agency.--The term ``Federal agency'' has the 
        meaning given such term in section 4 of the Stevenson-Wydler 
        Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3703).

                          TITLE V--INNOVATION

SEC. 501. OFFICE OF INNOVATION AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP.

  The Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 
3701 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
section:

``SEC. 24. OFFICE OF INNOVATION AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP.

  ``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish an Office of 
Innovation and Entrepreneurship to foster innovation and the 
commercialization of new technologies, products, processes, and 
services with the goal of promoting productivity and economic growth in 
the United States.
  ``(b) Duties.--The Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship shall be 
responsible for--
          ``(1) developing and advocating policies to accelerate 
        innovation and advance the commercialization of research and 
        development, including federally funded research and 
        development;
          ``(2) identifying existing barriers to innovation and 
        commercialization, including access to capital and other 
        resources, and ways to overcome those barriers;
          ``(3) providing access to relevant data, research, and 
        technical assistance on innovation and commercialization;
          ``(4) strengthening collaboration on and coordination of 
        policies relating to innovation and commercialization within 
        the Department of Commerce and between the Department of 
        Commerce and other Federal agencies, as appropriate; and
          ``(5) any other duties as determined by the Secretary.
  ``(c) Advisory Committee.--The Secretary shall establish an Advisory 
Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship to provide advice to the 
Secretary on carrying out subsection (b).''.

SEC. 502. FEDERAL LOAN GUARANTEES FOR INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES IN 
                    MANUFACTURING.

  The Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 
3701 et seq.) is further amended by adding after section 24, as added 
by section 501 of this title, the following new section:

``SEC. 25. FEDERAL LOAN GUARANTEES FOR INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES IN 
                    MANUFACTURING.

  ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a program to 
provide loan guarantees for obligations to small- or medium-sized 
manufacturers for the use or production of innovative technologies.
  ``(b) Eligible Projects.--A loan guarantee may be made under such 
program only for a project that reequips, expands, or establishes a 
manufacturing facility in the United States to--
          ``(1) use an innovative technology or an innovative process 
        in manufacturing; or
          ``(2) manufacture an innovative technology product or an 
        integral component of such product.
  ``(c) Eligible Borrower.--A loan guarantee may be made under such 
program only for a borrower who is a small- or medium-sized 
manufacturer, as determined by the Secretary under the criteria 
established pursuant to subsection (m).
  ``(d) Limitation on Amount.--A loan guarantee shall not exceed an 
amount equal to 80 percent of the obligation, as estimated at the time 
at which the loan guarantee is issued.
  ``(e) Limitations on Loan Guarantee.--No loan guarantee shall be made 
unless the Secretary determines that--
          ``(1) there is a reasonable prospect of repayment of the 
        principal and interest on the obligation by the borrower;
          ``(2) the amount of the obligation (when combined with 
        amounts available to the borrower from other sources) is 
        sufficient to carry out the project;
          ``(3) the obligation is not subordinate to other financing;
          ``(4) the obligation bears interest at a rate that does not 
        exceed a level that the Secretary determines appropriate, 
        taking into account the prevailing rate of interest in the 
        private sector for similar loans and risks; and
          ``(5) the term of an obligation requires full repayment over 
        a period not to exceed the lesser of--
                  ``(A) 30 years; or
                  ``(B) 90 percent of the projected useful life, as 
                determined by the Secretary, of the physical asset to 
                be financed by the obligation.
  ``(f) Defaults.--
          ``(1) Payment by secretary.--
                  ``(A) In general.--If a borrower defaults (as defined 
                in regulations promulgated by the Secretary and 
                specified in the loan guarantee) on the obligation, the 
                holder of the loan guarantee shall have the right to 
                demand payment of the unpaid amount from the Secretary.
                  ``(B) Payment required.--Within such period as may be 
                specified in the loan guarantee or related agreements, 
                the Secretary shall pay to the holder of the loan 
                guarantee the unpaid interest on and unpaid principal 
                of the obligation as to which the borrower has 
                defaulted, unless the Secretary finds that there was no 
                default by the borrower in the payment of interest or 
                principal or that the default has been remedied.
                  ``(C) Forbearance.--Nothing in this subsection 
                precludes any forbearance by the holder of the 
                obligation for the benefit of the borrower which may be 
                agreed upon by the parties to the obligation and 
                approved by the Secretary.
          ``(2) Subrogation.--
                  ``(A) In general.--If the Secretary makes a payment 
                under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall be subrogated 
                to the rights, as specified in the loan guarantee, of 
                the recipient of the payment or related agreements 
                including, if appropriate, the authority 
                (notwithstanding any other provision of law) to--
                          ``(i) complete, maintain, operate, lease, or 
                        otherwise dispose of any property acquired 
                        pursuant to such loan guarantee or related 
                        agreement; or
                          ``(ii) permit the borrower, pursuant to an 
                        agreement with the Secretary, to continue to 
                        pursue the purposes of the project if the 
                        Secretary determines that such an agreement is 
                        in the public interest.
                  ``(B) Superiority of rights.--The rights of the 
                Secretary, with respect to any property acquired 
                pursuant to a loan guarantee or related agreements, 
                shall be superior to the rights of any other person 
                with respect to the property.
          ``(3) Action by attorney general.--
                  ``(A) Notification.--If the borrower defaults on an 
                obligation, the Secretary shall notify the Attorney 
                General of the default.
                  ``(B) Recovery.--On notification, the Attorney 
                General shall take such action as is appropriate to 
                recover the unpaid principal and interest.
  ``(g) Payment of Principal and Interest by Secretary.--With respect 
to any obligation guaranteed under this section, the Secretary may 
enter into a contract to pay, and pay, holders of the obligation for 
and on behalf of the borrower from funds appropriated for that purpose 
the principal and interest payments that become due and payable on the 
unpaid balance of the obligation if the Secretary finds that--
          ``(1)(A) the borrower is unable to make the payments and is 
        not in default;
          ``(B) it is in the public interest to permit the borrower to 
        continue to pursue the project; and
          ``(C) the probable net benefit to the Federal Government in 
        paying the principal and interest will be greater than that 
        which would result in the event of a default;
          ``(2) the amount of the payment that the Secretary is 
        authorized to pay shall be no greater than the amount of 
        principal and interest that the borrower is obligated to pay 
        under the obligation being guaranteed; and
          ``(3) the borrower agrees to reimburse the Secretary for the 
        payment (including interest) on terms and conditions that are 
        satisfactory to the Secretary.
  ``(h) Terms and Conditions.--A loan guarantee under this section 
shall include such detailed terms and conditions as the Secretary 
determines appropriate to--
          ``(1) protect the interests of the United States in the case 
        of default; and
          ``(2) have available all the patents and technology necessary 
        for any person selected, including the Secretary, to complete 
        and operate the project.
  ``(i) Consultation.--In establishing the terms and conditions of a 
loan guarantee under this section, the Secretary shall consult with the 
Secretary of the Treasury.
  ``(j) Fees.--
          ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall charge and collect 
        fees for loan guarantees in amounts the Secretary determines 
        are sufficient to cover applicable administrative expenses.
          ``(2) Availability.--Fees collected under this subsection 
        shall--
                  ``(A) be deposited by the Secretary into the Treasury 
                of the United States; and
                  ``(B) remain available until expended, subject to 
                such other conditions as are contained in annual 
                appropriations Acts.
  ``(k) Records.--
          ``(1) In general.--With respect to a loan guarantee under 
        this section, the borrower, the lender, and any other 
        appropriate party shall keep such records and other pertinent 
        documents as the Secretary shall prescribe by regulation, 
        including such records as the Secretary may require to 
        facilitate an effective audit.
          ``(2) Access.--The Secretary and the Comptroller General of 
        the United States, or their duly authorized representatives, 
        shall have access to records and other pertinent documents for 
        the purpose of conducting an audit.
  ``(l) Full Faith and Credit.--The full faith and credit of the United 
States is pledged to the payment of all loan guarantees issued under 
this section with respect to principal and interest.
  ``(m) Regulations.--The Secretary shall issue final regulations 
before making any loan guarantees under the program. Such regulations 
shall include--
          ``(1) criteria that the Secretary shall use to determine 
        eligibility for loan guarantees under this section, including--
                  ``(A) whether a borrower is a small- or medium-sized 
                manufacturer; and
                  ``(B) whether a borrower demonstrates that a market 
                exists for the innovative technology product, or the 
                integral component of such product, to be manufactured, 
                as evidenced by written statements of interest from 
                potential purchasers;
          ``(2) policies and procedures for selecting and monitoring 
        lenders and loan performance; and
          ``(3) any other policies, procedures, or information 
        necessary to implement this section.
  ``(n) Audit.--
          ``(1) Annual independent audits.--The Secretary shall enter 
        into an arrangement with an independent auditor for annual 
        evaluations of the program under this section.
          ``(2) Annual review.--The Comptroller General shall conduct 
        an annual review of the Secretary's execution of the program 
        under this section.
          ``(3) Report.--The results of the independent audit under 
        paragraph (1) and the Comptroller General's review under 
        paragraph (2) shall be provided directly to the Committee on 
        Science and Technology of the House of Representatives and the 
        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 
        Senate.
  ``(o) Report to Congress.--Concurrent with the submission to Congress 
of the President's annual budget request in each year after the date of 
enactment of this section, the Secretary shall transmit to the 
Committee on Science and Technology of the House of Representatives and 
the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a 
report containing a summary of all activities carried out under this 
section.
  ``(p) Coordination and Nonduplication.--To the maximum extent 
practicable, the Secretary shall ensure that the activities carried out 
under this section are coordinated with, and do not duplicate the 
efforts of, other loan guarantee programs within the Federal 
Government.
  ``(q) MEP Centers.--The Secretary may use centers established under 
section 25 of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act 
(15 U.S.C. 278k) to provide information about the program established 
under this section and to conduct outreach to potential borrowers, as 
appropriate.
  ``(r) Minimizing Risk.--The Secretary shall promulgate regulations 
and policies to carry out this section in accordance with Office of 
Management and Budget Circular No. A-129, entitled `Policies for 
Federal Credit Programs and Non-Tax Receivables', as in effect on the 
date of enactment of this section.
  ``(s) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that no loan 
guarantee shall be made under this section unless the borrower agrees 
to use a federally-approved electronic employment eligibility 
verification system to verify the employment eligibility of--
          ``(1) all persons hired during the contract term by the 
        borrower to perform employment duties within the United States; 
        and
          ``(2) all persons assigned by the borrower to perform work 
        within the United States on the project.
  ``(t) Definitions.--In this section:
          ``(1) Cost.--The term `cost' has the meaning given such term 
        under section 502 of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (2 
        U.S.C. 661a).
          ``(2) Innovative process.--The term `innovative process' 
        means a process that is significantly improved as compared to 
        the process in general use in the commercial marketplace in the 
        United States at the time the loan guarantee is issued.
          ``(3) Innovative technology.--The term `innovative 
        technology' means a technology that is significantly improved 
        as compared to the technology in general use in the commercial 
        marketplace in the United States at the time the loan guarantee 
        is issued.
          ``(4) Loan guarantee.--The term `loan guarantee' has the 
        meaning given such term in section 502 of the Federal Credit 
        Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 661a). The term includes a loan 
        guarantee commitment (as defined in section 502 of such Act (2 
        U.S.C. 661a)).
          ``(5) Obligation.--The term `obligation' means the loan or 
        other debt obligation that is guaranteed under this section.
          ``(6) Program.--The term `program' means the loan guarantee 
        program established in subsection (a).
  ``(u) Authorization of Appropriations.--
          ``(1) Cost of loan guarantees.--There are authorized to be 
        appropriated $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2011 through 
        2015 to provide the cost of loan guarantees under this section.
          ``(2) Principal and interest.--There are authorized to be 
        appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out subsection 
        (g).''.

SEC. 503. REGIONAL INNOVATION PROGRAM.

  The Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 
3701 et seq.) is further amended by adding after section 25, as added 
by section 502 of this title, the following new section:

``SEC. 26. REGIONAL INNOVATION PROGRAM.

  ``(a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a regional 
innovation program to encourage and support the development of regional 
innovation strategies, including regional innovation clusters.
  ``(b) Regional Innovation Cluster Grants.--
          ``(1) In general.--As part of the program established under 
        subsection (a), the Secretary may award grants on a competitive 
        basis to eligible recipients for activities relating to the 
        formation and development of regional innovation clusters.
          ``(2) Permissible activities.--Grants awarded under this 
        subsection may be used for activities determined appropriate by 
        the Secretary, including the following:
                  ``(A) Feasibility studies.
                  ``(B) Planning activities.
                  ``(C) Technical assistance.
                  ``(D) Developing or strengthening communication and 
                collaboration between and among participants of a 
                regional innovation cluster.
                  ``(E) Attracting additional participants to a 
                regional innovation cluster.
                  ``(F) Facilitating market development of products and 
                services developed by a regional innovation cluster, 
                including through demonstration, deployment, technology 
                transfer, and commercialization activities.
                  ``(G) Developing relationships between a regional 
                innovation cluster and entities or clusters in other 
                regions.
          ``(3) Eligible recipient.--For purposes of this subsection, 
        the term `eligible recipient' means any of the following:
                  ``(A) A State.
                  ``(B) An Indian tribe.
                  ``(C) A city or other political subdivision of a 
                State.
                  ``(D) An entity that--
                          ``(i) is a nonprofit organization, an 
                        institution of higher education, a public-
                        private partnership, or an economic development 
                        organization or similar entity; and
                          ``(ii) has an application that is supported 
                        by a State or a political subdivision of a 
                        State.
                  ``(E) A consortium of any of the entities listed in 
                subparagraphs (A) through (D).
          ``(4) Application.--
                  ``(A) In general.--An eligible recipient shall submit 
                an application to the Secretary at such time, in such 
                manner, and containing such information and assurances 
                as the Secretary may require.
                  ``(B) Components.--The application shall include, at 
                a minimum, a description of the regional innovation 
                cluster supported by the proposed activity, including a 
                description of the following:
                          ``(i) Whether the regional innovation cluster 
                        is supported by the private sector, State and 
                        local governments, and other relevant 
                        stakeholders.
                          ``(ii) How the existing participants in the 
                        regional innovation cluster will encourage and 
                        solicit participation by all types of entities 
                        that might benefit from participation, 
                        including newly formed entities and those rival 
                        to existing participants.
                          ``(iii) The extent to which the regional 
                        innovation cluster is likely to stimulate 
                        innovation and have a positive impact on 
                        regional economic growth and development.
                          ``(iv) Whether the participants in the 
                        regional innovation cluster have access to, or 
                        contribute to, a well-trained workforce.
                          ``(v) Whether the participants in the 
                        regional innovation cluster are capable of 
                        attracting additional funds from non-Federal 
                        sources.
                          ``(vi) The likelihood that the participants 
                        in the regional innovation cluster will be able 
                        to sustain activities once grant funds under 
                        this subsection have been expended.
          ``(5) Cost share.--The Secretary may not provide more than 50 
        percent of the total cost of any activity funded under this 
        subsection.
          ``(6) Use and application of research and information 
        program.--To the maximum extent practicable, the Secretary 
        shall ensure that activities funded under this subsection use 
        and apply any relevant research, best practices, and metrics 
        developed under the program established in subsection (c).
  ``(c) Regional Innovation Research and Information Program.--
          ``(1) In general.--As part of the program established under 
        subsection (a), the Secretary shall establish a regional 
        innovation research and information program to--
                  ``(A) gather, analyze, and disseminate information on 
                best practices for regional innovation strategies 
                (including regional innovation clusters), including 
                information relating to how innovation, productivity, 
                and economic development can be maximized through such 
                strategies;
                  ``(B) provide technical assistance, including through 
                the development of technical assistance guides, for the 
                development and implementation of regional innovation 
                strategies (including regional innovation clusters);
                  ``(C) support the development of relevant metrics and 
                measurement standards to evaluate regional innovation 
                strategies (including regional innovation clusters), 
                including the extent to which such strategies stimulate 
                innovation, productivity, and economic development; and
                  ``(D) collect and make available data on regional 
                innovation cluster activity in the United States, 
                including data on--
                          ``(i) the size, specialization, and 
                        competitiveness of regional innovation 
                        clusters;
                          ``(ii) the regional domestic product 
                        contribution, total jobs and earnings by key 
                        occupations, establishment size, nature of 
                        specialization, patents, Federal research and 
                        development spending, and other relevant 
                        information for regional innovation clusters; 
                        and
                          ``(iii) supply chain product and service 
                        flows within and between regional innovation 
                        clusters.
          ``(2) Research grants.--The Secretary may award research 
        grants on a competitive basis to support and further the goals 
        of the program established under this subsection.
          ``(3) Dissemination of information.--Data and analysis 
        compiled by the Secretary under the program established in this 
        subsection shall be made available to other Federal agencies, 
        State and local governments, and nonprofit and for-profit 
        entities.
          ``(4) Cluster grant program.--The Secretary shall incorporate 
        data and analysis relating to any regional innovation cluster 
        supported by a grant under subsection (b) into the program 
        established under this subsection.
  ``(d) Interagency Coordination.--
          ``(1) In general.--To the maximum extent practicable, the 
        Secretary shall ensure that the activities carried out under 
        this section are coordinated with, and do not duplicate the 
        efforts of, other programs at the Department of Commerce or 
        other Federal agencies.
          ``(2) Collaboration.--The Secretary shall explore and pursue 
        collaboration with other Federal agencies, including through 
        multiagency funding opportunities, on regional innovation 
        strategies.
  ``(e) Evaluation.--
          ``(1) In general.--Not later than 4 years after the date of 
        enactment of this section, the Secretary shall enter into a 
        contract with an independent entity, such as the National 
        Academy of Sciences, to conduct an evaluation of the program 
        established under subsection (a).
          ``(2) Requirements.--The evaluation shall include--
                  ``(A) whether such program is achieving its goals;
                  ``(B) any recommendations for how such program may be 
                improved; and
                  ``(C) a recommendation as to whether such program 
                should be continued or terminated.
  ``(f) Regional Innovation Cluster Defined.--The term `regional 
innovation cluster' means a geographically bounded network of similar, 
synergistic, or complementary entities that--
          ``(1) are engaged in or with a particular industry sector;
          ``(2) have active channels for business transactions and 
        communication;
          ``(3) share specialized infrastructure, labor markets, and 
        services; and
          ``(4) leverage the region's unique competitive strengths to 
        stimulate innovation and create jobs.
  ``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be 
appropriated such sums as are necessary for each of fiscal years 2011 
through 2015 to carry out this section, including such sums as are 
necessary to carry out the evaluation required under subsection (e).''.

                     TITLE VI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

                     Subtitle A--Office of Science

SEC. 601. SHORT TITLE.

  This subtitle may be cited as the ``Department of Energy Office of 
Science Authorization Act of 2010''.

SEC. 602. DEFINITIONS.

  Except as otherwise provided, in this subtitle:
          (1) Department.--The term ``Department'' means the Department 
        of Energy.
          (2) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of 
        the Office of Science.
          (3) Office of science.--The term ``Office of Science'' means 
        the Department of Energy Office of Science.
          (4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of 
        Energy.

SEC. 603. MISSION OF THE OFFICE OF SCIENCE.

  (a) Mission.--The mission of the Office of Science shall be the 
delivery of scientific discoveries, capabilities, and major scientific 
tools to transform the understanding of nature and to advance the 
energy, economic, and national security of the United States.
  (b) Duties.--In support of this mission, the Secretary shall carry 
out, through the Office of Science, programs on basic energy sciences, 
biological and environmental research, advanced scientific computing 
research, fusion energy sciences, high energy physics, and nuclear 
physics through activities focused on--
          (1) Science for Discovery to unravel nature's mysteries 
        through the study of subatomic particles, atoms, and molecules 
        that make up the materials of our everyday world to DNA, 
        proteins, cells, and entire biological systems;
          (2) Science for National Need by--
                  (A) advancing a clean energy agenda through research 
                on energy production, storage, transmission, 
                efficiency, and use; and
                  (B) advancing our understanding of the Earth's 
                climate through research in atmospheric and 
                environmental sciences and climate change; and
          (3) National Scientific User Facilities to deliver the 21st 
        century tools of science, engineering, and technology and 
        provide the Nation's researchers with the most advanced tools 
        of modern science including accelerators, colliders, 
        supercomputers, light sources and neutron sources, and 
        facilities for studying the nanoworld.
  (c) Supporting Activities.--The activities described in subsection 
(b) shall include providing for relevant facilities and infrastructure, 
analysis, coordination, and education and outreach activities.
  (d) User Facilities.--The Director shall carry out the construction, 
operation, and maintenance of user facilities to support the activities 
described in subsection (b). As practicable, these facilities shall 
serve the needs of the Department, industry, the academic community, 
and other relevant entities for the purposes of advancing the missions 
of the Department.
  (e) Other Authorized Activities.--In addition to the activities 
authorized under this subtitle, the Office of Science shall carry out 
such other activities it is authorized or required to carry out by law.
  (f) Coordination and Joint Activities.--The Department's Under 
Secretary for Science shall ensure the coordination of activities under 
this subtitle with the other activities of the Department, and shall 
support joint activities among the programs of the Department.
  (g) Domestically Sourced Hardware.--
          (1) Plan.--The Director shall develop a plan to increase the 
        percentage of domestically sourced hardware for planned and 
        ongoing projects of the Department of Energy. In developing 
        this plan, the Director shall--
                  (A) give consideration to technologies that the 
                United States does not currently have the capacity to 
                manufacture and to procurement activities that can 
                strengthen United States high-technology 
                competitiveness broadly;
                  (B) seek opportunities to engage and partner with 
                domestic manufacturers; and
                  (C) annually assess levels of domestically available 
                goods relevant to planned and ongoing projects of the 
                Office of Science.
          (2) International agreements.--This subsection shall be 
        applied in a manner consistent with United States obligations 
        under international agreements.
          (3) Report to congress.--Not later than 1 year after the date 
        of enactment of this Act, the Director shall transmit the plan 
        developed under this subsection to the Committee on Energy and 
        Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Science 
        and Technology of the House of Representatives, and shall 
        transmit any appropriate updates to those committees.
  (h) Merit-reviewed Study.--As part of the President's annual budget 
request, the Secretary shall include a detailed summary of the degree 
to which current research activities are competitive and merit-
reviewed, including a list of activities that would have been 
undertaken in the absence of Congressionally-directed projects and an 
analysis of the effects of increasing the proportion of competitive, 
merit-reviewed activities on the strategic objectives of the Office of 
Science.

SEC. 604. BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES PROGRAM.

  (a) Program.--As part of the activities authorized under section 603, 
the Director shall carry out a program in basic energy sciences, 
including materials sciences and engineering, chemical sciences, 
physical biosciences, and geosciences, for the purpose of providing the 
scientific foundations for new energy technologies.
  (b) Basic Energy Sciences User Facilities.--
          (1) In general.--The Director shall carry out a program for 
        the construction, operation, and maintenance of national user 
        facilities to support the program under this section. As 
        practicable, these facilities shall serve the needs of the 
        Department, industry, the academic community, and other 
        relevant entities to create and examine new materials and 
        chemical processes for the purposes of advancing new energy 
        technologies and improving the competitiveness of the United 
        States. These facilities shall include--
                  (A) x-ray light sources;
                  (B) neutron sources;
                  (C) electron beam microcharacterization centers;
                  (D) nanoscale science research centers; and
                  (E) other facilities the Director considers 
                appropriate, consistent with section 603(d).
          (2) Facility construction and upgrades.--Consistent with the 
        Office of Science's project management practices, the Director 
        shall support construction of--
                  (A) the National Synchrotron Light Source II;
                  (B) a Second Target Station at the Spallation Neutron 
                Source; and
                  (C) an upgrade of the Advanced Photon Source to 
                improve brightness and performance.
  (c) Energy Frontier Research Centers.--
          (1) In general.--The Director shall carry out a grant program 
        to provide awards, on a competitive, merit-reviewed basis, to 
        multi-institutional collaborations or other appropriate 
        entities to conduct fundamental and use-inspired energy 
        research to accelerate scientific breakthroughs related to 
        needs identified in--
                  (A) the Grand Challenges report of the Department's 
                Basic Energy Sciences Advisory Committee;
                  (B) the Basic Energy Sciences Basic Research Needs 
                workshop reports;
                  (C) energy-related Grand Challenges for Engineering, 
                as described by the National Academy of Engineering; or
                  (D) other relevant reports identified by the 
                Director.
          (2) Collaborations.--A collaboration receiving a grant under 
        this subsection may include multiple types of institutions and 
        private sector entities.
          (3) Selection and duration.--
                  (A) In general.--A collaboration under this 
                subsection shall be selected for a period of 5 years.
                  (B) Reapplication.--After the end of the period 
                described in subparagraph (A), a grantee may reapply 
                for selection for a second period of 5 years on a 
                competitive, merit-reviewed basis.
          (4) No funding for construction.--No funding provided 
        pursuant to this subsection may be used for the construction of 
        new buildings or facilities.
  (d) Accelerator Research and Development.--The Director shall carry 
out research and development on advanced accelerator technologies 
relevant to the development of Basic Energy Sciences user facilities, 
in consultation with the Office of Science's High Energy Physics and 
Nuclear Physics programs.

SEC. 605. BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH PROGRAM.

  (a) In General.--As part of the activities authorized under section 
603, and coordinated with the activities authorized in section 604, the 
Director shall carry out a program of research, development, and 
demonstration in the areas of biological systems science and climate 
and environmental science to support the energy and environmental 
missions of the Department.
  (b) Biological Systems Science Activities.--
          (1) Activities.--As part of the activities authorized under 
        subsection (a), the Director shall carry out research, 
        development, and demonstration activities in fundamental, 
        structural, computational, and systems biology to increase 
        systems-level understanding of complex biological systems, 
        which shall include activities to--
                  (A) accelerate breakthroughs and new knowledge that 
                will enable cost-effective sustainable production of--
                          (i) biomass-based liquid transportation 
                        fuels, including hydrogen;
                          (ii) bioenergy; and
                          (iii) biobased products,

                that support the energy and environmental missions of 
                the Department;
                  (B) improve understanding of the global carbon cycle, 
                including processes for removing carbon dioxide from 
                the atmosphere, through photosynthesis and other 
                biological processes, for sequestration and storage; 
                and
                  (C) understand the biological mechanisms used to 
                destroy, immobilize, or remove contaminants from 
                subsurface environments.
          (2) Research plan.--
                  (A) Requirement.--Not later than 1 year after the 
                date of enactment of this Act, the Director shall 
                prepare and transmit to Congress a research plan 
                describing how the activities authorized under this 
                subsection will be undertaken.
                  (B) Utilization of existing plan.--In developing the 
                plan in subparagraph (A), the Director may utilize an 
                existing research plan and update such plan to 
                incorporate the activities identified in paragraph (1).
                  (C) Updates.--Not later than 3 years after the 
                initial report under this paragraph, and at least once 
                every 3 years thereafter, the Director shall update the 
                research plan and transmit it to Congress.
          (3) Bioenergy research centers.--
                  (A) In general.--In carrying out the activities under 
                paragraph (1), the Director shall support at least 3 
                bioenergy research centers to accelerate basic 
                biological research, development, demonstration, and 
                commercial application of biomass-based liquid 
                transportation fuels, bioenergy, and biobased products 
                that support the energy and environmental missions of 
                the Department and are produced from a variety of 
                regionally diverse feedstocks.
                  (B) Geographic distribution.--The Director shall 
                ensure that the bioenergy research centers under this 
                paragraph are established in geographically diverse 
                locations.
                  (C) Selection and duration.--A center established 
                under subparagraph (A) shall be selected on a 
                competitive, merit-reviewed basis for a period of 5 
                years beginning on the date of establishment of that 
                center. A center already in existence on the date of 
                enactment of this Act may continue to receive support 
                for a period of 5 years beginning on the date of 
                establishment of that center.
          (4) Enabling synthetic biology plan.--
                  (A) In general.--The Secretary, in consultation with 
                other relevant Federal agencies, the academic 
                community, research-based nonprofit entities, and the 
                private sector, shall develop a comprehensive plan for 
                federally supported research and development activities 
                that will support the energy and environmental missions 
                of the Department and enable a competitive synthetic 
                biology industry in the United States.
                  (B) Plan.--The plan developed under subparagraph (A) 
                shall assess the need to create a database for 
                synthetic biology information, the need and process for 
                developing standards for biological parts, components 
                and systems, and the need for a federally funded 
                facility that enables the discovery, design, 
                development, production, and systematic use of parts, 
                components, and systems created through synthetic 
                biology. The plan shall describe the role of the 
                Federal Government in meeting these needs.
                  (C) Submission to congress.--The Secretary shall 
                transmit the plan developed under subparagraph (A) to 
                the Congress not later than 9 months after the date of 
                enactment of this Act.
          (5) Computational biology and systems biology 
        knowledgebase.--As part of the activities described in 
        paragraph (1), the Director, in collaboration with the Advanced 
        Scientific Computing Research program described in section 606, 
        shall carry out research in computational biology, acquire or 
        otherwise ensure the availability of hardware for biology-
        specific computation, and establish and maintain an open 
        virtual database and information management system to centrally 
        integrate systems biology data, analytical software, and 
        computational modeling tools that will allow data sharing and 
        free information exchange within the scientific community.
          (6) Prohibition on biomedical and human cell and human 
        subject research.--
                  (A) No biomedical research.--In carrying out 
                activities under subsection (b), the Secretary shall 
                not conduct biomedical research.
                  (B) Limitations.--Nothing in subsection (b) shall 
                authorize the Secretary to conduct any research or 
                demonstrations--
                          (i) on human cells or human subjects; or
                          (ii) designed to have direct application with 
                        respect to human cells or human subjects.
                  (C) Information sharing.--Nothing in this paragraph 
                shall restrict the Department from sharing information, 
                including research findings, research methodologies, 
                models, or any other information, with any Federal 
                agency.
          (7) Repeal.--Section 977 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 
        U.S.C. 16317) is repealed.
  (c) Climate and Environmental Sciences Activities.--
          (1) In general.--As part of the activities authorized under 
        subsection (a), the Director shall carry out climate and 
        environmental science research, which shall include activities 
        to--
                  (A) understand, observe, and model the response of 
                the Earth's atmosphere and biosphere, including oceans, 
                to increased concentrations of greenhouse gas 
                emissions, and any associated changes in climate;
                  (B) understand the processes for sequestration, 
                destruction, immobilization, or removal of, and 
                understand the movement of, contaminants and carbon in 
                subsurface environments, including at facilities of the 
                Department; and
                  (C) inform potential mitigation and adaptation 
                options for increased concentrations of greenhouse gas 
                emissions and any associated changes in climate.
          (2) Subsurface biogeochemistry research.--
                  (A) In general.--As part of the activities described 
                in paragraph (1), the Director shall carry out research 
                to advance a fundamental understanding of coupled 
                physical, chemical, and biological processes for 
                controlling the movement of sequestered carbon and 
                subsurface environmental contaminants, including field 
                observations of subsurface microorganisms and field-
                scale subsurface research.
                  (B) Coordination.--
                          (i) Director.--The Director shall carry out 
                        activities under this paragraph in accordance 
                        with priorities established by the Department's 
                        Under Secretary for Science to support and 
                        accelerate the decontamination of relevant 
                        facilities managed by the Department.
                          (ii) Under secretary for science.--The 
                        Department's Under Secretary for Science shall 
                        ensure the coordination of the activities of 
                        the Department, including activities under this 
                        paragraph, to support and accelerate the 
                        decontamination of relevant facilities managed 
                        by the Department.
          (3) Next-generation ecosystem-climate experiment.--
                  (A) In general.--As part of the activities described 
                in paragraph (1), the Director, in collaboration with 
                other relevant agencies that are participants in the 
                United States Global Change Research Program, shall 
                carry out the selection and development of a next-
                generation ecosystem-climate change experiment to 
                understand the impact and feedbacks of increased 
                temperature and elevated carbon levels on ecosystems.
                  (B) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
                enactment of this Act, the Director shall transmit to 
                the Congress a report containing--
                          (i) an identification of the location or 
                        locations that have been selected for the 
                        experiment described in subparagraph (A);
                          (ii) a description of the need for additional 
                        experiments; and
                          (iii) an associated research plan.
          (4) Ameriflux network coordination and research.--As part of 
        the activities described in paragraph (1), the Director shall 
        carry out research and coordinate the AmeriFlux Network to 
        directly observe and understand the exchange of greenhouse 
        gases, water vapor, and heat energy within terrestrial 
        ecosystems and the response of those systems to climate change 
        and other dynamic terrestrial landscape changes. The Director, 
        in collaboration with other relevant Federal agencies, shall--
                  (A) identify opportunities to incorporate innovative 
                and emerging observation technologies and practices 
                into the existing Network;
                  (B) conduct research to determine the need for 
                increased greenhouse gas observation Network facilities 
                across North America to meet future mitigation and 
                adaptation needs of the United States; and
                  (C) examine how the technologies and practices 
                described in subparagraph (A), and increased 
                coordination among scientific communities through the 
                Network, have the potential to help characterize 
                terrestrial baseline greenhouse gas emission sources 
                and sinks in the United States and internationally.
          (5) Climate and earth modeling.--As part of the activities 
        described in paragraph (1), the Director, in collaboration with 
        the Advanced Scientific Computing Research program described in 
        section 606, shall carry out research to develop, evaluate, and 
        use high-resolution regional climate, global climate, Earth, 
        and predictive models to inform decisions on reducing the 
        impacts of changing climate.
          (6) Integrated assessment research.--As part of the 
        activities described in paragraph (1), the Director shall carry 
        out research into options for mitigation of and adaptation to 
        climate change through multiscale models of the entire climate 
        system. Such modeling shall include human processes and 
        greenhouse gas emissions, land use, and interaction among human 
        and Earth systems.
          (7) Coordination.--The Director shall coordinate activities 
        under this subsection with other Office of Science activities 
        and with the United States Global Change Research Program.
  (d) User Facilities and Ancillary Equipment.--
          (1) In general.--The Director shall carry out a program for 
        the construction, operation, and maintenance of user facilities 
        to support the program under this section. As practicable, 
        these facilities shall serve the needs of the Department, 
        industry, the academic community, and other relevant entities.
          (2) Included functions.--User facilities described in 
        paragraph (1) shall include facilities which carry out--
                  (A) genome sequencing and analysis of plants, 
                microbes, and microbial communities using high 
                throughput tools, technologies, and comparative 
                analysis;
                  (B) molecular level research in biological, chemical, 
                environmental, and subsurface sciences, including 
                synthesis, dynamic properties, and interactions among 
                natural and engineered materials; and
                  (C) measurement of cloud and aerosol properties used 
                for examining atmospheric processes and evaluating 
                climate model performance, including ground stations at 
                various locations, mobile resources, and aerial 
                vehicles.

SEC. 606. ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING RESEARCH PROGRAM.

  (a) In General.--As part of the activities authorized under section 
603, the Director shall carry out a research, development, 
demonstration, and commercial application program to advance 
computational and networking capabilities to analyze, model, simulate, 
and predict complex phenomena relevant to the development of new energy 
technologies and the competitiveness of the United States.
  (b) Coordination.--
          (1) Director.--The Director shall carry out activities under 
        this section in accordance with priorities established by the 
        Department's Under Secretary for Science to determine and meet 
        the computational and networking research and facility needs of 
        the Office of Science and all other relevant energy technology 
        and energy efficiency programs within the Department.
          (2) Under secretary for science.--The Department's Under 
        Secretary for Science shall ensure the coordination of the 
        activities of the Department, including activities under this 
        section, to determine and meet the computational and networking 
        research and facility needs of the Office of Science and all 
        other relevant energy technology and energy efficiency programs 
        within the Department.
  (c) Research to Support Energy Applications.--As part of the 
activities authorized under subsection (a), the program shall support 
research in high-performance computing and networking relevant to 
energy applications, including both basic and applied energy research 
programs carried out by the Secretary.
  (d) Reports.--
          (1) Advanced computing for energy applications.--Not later 
        than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the 
        Secretary shall transmit to the Congress a plan to integrate 
        and leverage the expertise and capabilities of the program 
        described in subsection (a), as well as other relevant 
        computational and networking research programs and resources 
        supported by the Federal Government, to advance the missions of 
        the Department's applied energy and energy efficiency programs.
          (2) Exascale computing.--At least 18 months prior to the 
        initiation of construction or installation of any exascale-
        class computing facility, the Secretary shall transmit a plan 
        to the Congress detailing--
                  (A) the proposed facility's cost projections and 
                capabilities to significantly accelerate the 
                development of new energy technologies;
                  (B) technical risks and challenges that must be 
                overcome to achieve successful completion and operation 
                of the facility; and
                  (C) an assessment of the scientific and technological 
                advances expected from such a facility relative to 
                those expected from a comparable investment in expanded 
                research and applications at terascale-class and 
                petascale-class computing facilities.
  (e) Applied Mathematics and Software Development for High-end 
Computing Systems.--The Director shall carry out activities to develop, 
test, and support mathematics, models, and algorithms for complex 
systems, as well as programming environments, tools, languages, and 
operating systems for high-end computing systems (as defined in section 
2 of the Department of Energy High-End Computing Revitalization Act of 
2004 (15 U.S.C. 5541)).
  (f) High-end Computing Facilities.--The Director shall--
          (1) provide for sustained access by the public and private 
        research community in the United States to high-end computing 
        systems, including access to the National Energy Research 
        Scientific Computing Center and to Leadership Systems (as 
        defined in section 2 of the Department of Energy High-End 
        Computing Revitalization Act of 2004 (15 U.S.C. 5541));
          (2) provide technical support for users of such systems; and
          (3) conduct research and development on next-generation 
        computing architectures and platforms to support the missions 
        of the Department.
  (g) Outreach.--The Secretary shall conduct outreach programs and may 
form partnerships to increase the use of and access to high-performance 
computing modeling and simulation capabilities by industry, including 
manufacturers.

SEC. 607. FUSION ENERGY RESEARCH PROGRAM.

  (a) Program.--As part of the activities authorized under section 603, 
the Director shall carry out a fusion energy sciences research and 
enabling technology development program to effectively address the 
scientific and engineering challenges to building a cost-competitive 
fusion power plant and a competitive fusion power industry in the 
United States. As part of this program, the Director shall carry out 
research activities to expand the fundamental understanding of plasmas 
and matter at very high temperatures and densities.
  (b) ITER.--The Director shall coordinate and carry out the 
responsibilities of the United States with respect to the ITER 
international fusion project pursuant to the Agreement on the 
Establishment of the ITER International Fusion Energy Organization for 
the Joint Implementation of the ITER Project.
  (c) Identification of Priorities.--Not later than 18 months after the 
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall transmit to the 
Congress a report on the Department's proposed research and development 
activities in magnetic fusion over the 10 years following the date of 
enactment of this Act under four realistic budget scenarios. The report 
shall--
          (1) identify specific areas of fusion energy research and 
        enabling technology development in which the United States can 
        and should establish or solidify a lead in the global fusion 
        energy development effort; and
          (2) identify priorities for initiation of facility 
        construction and facility decommissioning under each of those 
        scenarios.
  (d) Fusion Materials Research and Development.--The Director, in 
coordination with the Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy of the 
Department, shall carry out research and development activities to 
identify, characterize, and create materials that can endure the 
neutron, plasma, and heat fluxes expected in a commercial fusion power 
plant. As part of the activities authorized under subsection (c), the 
Secretary shall--
          (1) provide an assessment of the need for a facility or 
        facilities that can examine and test potential fusion and next 
        generation fission materials and other enabling technologies 
        relevant to the development of commercial fusion power plants; 
        and
          (2) provide an assessment of whether a single new facility 
        that substantially addresses magnetic fusion, inertial fusion, 
        and next generation fission materials research needs is 
        feasible, in conjunction with the expected capabilities of 
        facilities operational as of the date of enactment of this Act.
  (e) Enabling Technology Development.--The Director shall carry out 
activities to develop technologies necessary to enable the reliable, 
sustainable, safe, and economically competitive operation of a 
commercial fusion power plant.
  (f) Fusion Simulation Project.--In collaboration with the Office of 
Science's Advanced Scientific Computing Research program described in 
section 606, the Director shall carry out a computational project to 
advance the capability of fusion researchers to accurately simulate an 
entire fusion energy system.
  (g) Inertial Fusion Energy Research and Development Program.--The 
Secretary shall carry out a program of research and technology 
development in inertial fusion for energy applications, including ion 
beam and laser fusion. Not later than 180 days after the release of a 
report from the National Academies on inertial fusion energy research, 
the Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report describing the 
Department's plan to incorporate any relevant recommendations from the 
National Academies' report into this program.

SEC. 608. HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS PROGRAM.

  (a) Program.--As part of the activities authorized under section 603, 
the Director shall carry out a research program on the elementary 
constituents of matter and energy and the nature of space and time.
  (b) Neutrino Research.--As part of the program described in 
subsection (a), the Director shall carry out research activities on 
rare decay processes and the nature of the neutrino, which may--
          (1) include collaborations with the National Science 
        Foundation on relevant projects; and
          (2) utilize components of existing accelerator facilities to 
        produce neutrino beams of sufficient intensity to explore 
        research priorities identified by the High Energy Physics 
        Advisory Panel or the National Academy of Sciences.
  (c) Dark Energy and Dark Matter Research.--As part of the program 
described in subsection (a), the Director shall carry out research 
activities on the nature of dark energy and dark matter. These 
activities shall be consistent with research priorities identified by 
the High Energy Physics Advisory Panel or the National Academy of 
Sciences, and may include--
          (1) the development of space-based and land-based facilities 
        and experiments; and
          (2) collaborations with the National Aeronautics and Space 
        Administration, the National Science Foundation, or 
        international collaborations on relevant research projects.
  (d) Accelerator Research and Development.--The Director shall carry 
out research and development in advanced accelerator concepts and 
technologies to reduce the necessary scope and cost for the next 
generation of particle accelerators.
  (e) International Collaboration.--The Director, as practicable and in 
coordination with other appropriate Federal agencies as necessary, 
shall ensure the access of United States researchers to the most 
advanced accelerator facilities and research capabilities in the world, 
including the Large Hadron Collider.

SEC. 609. NUCLEAR PHYSICS PROGRAM.

  (a) Program.--As part of the activities authorized under section 603, 
the Director shall carry out a research program, and support relevant 
facilities, to discover and understand various forms of nuclear matter.
  (b) Facility Construction and Upgrades.--Consistent with the Office 
of Science's project management practices, the Director shall carry 
out--
          (1) an upgrade of the Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator 
        Facility to a 12 gigaelectronvolt beam of electrons; and
          (2) construction of the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams.
  (c) Isotope Development and Production for Research Applications.--
The Director shall carry out a program for the production of isotopes, 
including the development of techniques to produce isotopes, that the 
Secretary determines are needed for research or other purposes. In 
making this determination, the Secretary shall consider any relevant 
recommendations made by Federal advisory committees, the National 
Academies, and interagency working groups in which the Department 
participates.

SEC. 610. SCIENCE LABORATORIES INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAM.

  (a) Program.--The Director shall carry out a program to improve the 
safety, efficiency, and mission readiness of infrastructure at Office 
of Science laboratories. The program shall include projects to--
          (1) renovate or replace space that does not meet research 
        needs;
          (2) replace facilities that are no longer cost effective to 
        renovate or operate;
          (3) modernize utility systems to prevent failures and ensure 
        efficiency;
          (4) remove excess facilities to allow safe and efficient 
        operations; and
          (5) construct modern facilities to conduct advanced research 
        in controlled environmental conditions.
  (b) Minor Construction Projects.--
          (1) Authority.--Using operation and maintenance funds or 
        facilities and infrastructure funds authorized by law, the 
        Secretary may carry out minor construction projects with 
        respect to laboratories administered by the Office of Science.
          (2) Annual report.--The Secretary shall submit to Congress, 
        as part of the annual budget submission of the Department, a 
        report on each exercise of the authority under subsection (a) 
        during the preceding fiscal year. Each report shall include a 
        summary of maintenance and infrastructure needs and associated 
        funding requirements at each of the laboratories, including the 
        amount of both planned and deferred infrastructure spending at 
        each laboratory. Each report shall provide a brief description 
        of each minor construction project covered by the report.
          (3) Cost variation reports.--If, at any time during the 
        construction of any minor construction project, the estimated 
        cost of the project is revised and the revised cost of the 
        project exceeds the minor construction threshold, the Secretary 
        shall immediately submit to Congress a report explaining the 
        reasons for the cost variation.
          (4) Definitions.--In this section--
                  (A) the term ``minor construction project'' means any 
                plant project not specifically authorized by law for 
                which the approved total estimated cost does not exceed 
                the minor construction threshold; and
                  (B) the term ``minor construction threshold'' means 
                $10,000,000, with such amount to be adjusted by the 
                Secretary in accordance with the Engineering News-
                Record Construction Cost Index, or an appropriate 
                alternative index as determined by the Secretary, once 
                every five years after the date of enactment of this 
                Act.
          (5) Nonapplicability.--Sections 4703 and 4704 of the Atomic 
        Energy Defense Act (50 U.S.C. 2743 and 2744) shall not apply to 
        laboratories administered by the Office of Science.

SEC. 611. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

  There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for the 
activities of the Office of Science--
          (1) $5,247,000,000 for fiscal year 2011, of which--
                  (A) $1,875,000,000 shall be for Basic Energy Sciences 
                activities under section 604;
                  (B) $667,000,000 shall be for Biological and 
                Environmental Research activities under section 605; 
                and
                  (C) $466,000,000 shall be for Advanced Scientific 
                Computing Research activities under section 606;
          (2) $5,614,000,000 for fiscal year 2012, of which--
                  (A) $2,025,000,000 shall be for Basic Energy Sciences 
                activities under section 604;
                  (B) $720,000,000 shall be for Biological and 
                Environmental Research activities under section 605; 
                and
                  (C) $503,000,000 shall be for Advanced Scientific 
                Computing Research activities under section 606;
          (3) $6,007,000,000 for fiscal year 2013, of which--
                  (A) $2,187,000,000 shall be for Basic Energy Sciences 
                activities under section 604;
                  (B) $778,000,000 shall be for Biological and 
                Environmental Research activities under section 605; 
                and
                  (C) $544,000,000 shall be for Advanced Scientific 
                Computing Research activities under section 606;
          (4) $6,428,000,000 for fiscal year 2014, of which--
                  (A) $2,362,000,000 shall be for Basic Energy Sciences 
                activities under section 604;
                  (B) $840,000,000 shall be for Biological and 
                Environmental Research activities under section 605; 
                and
                  (C) $587,000,000 shall be for Advanced Scientific 
                Computing Research activities under section 606; and
          (5) $6,878,000,000 for fiscal year 2015, of which--
                  (A) $2,551,000,000 shall be for Basic Energy Sciences 
                activities under section 604;
                  (B) $907,000,000 shall be for Biological and 
                Environmental Research activities under section 605; 
                and
                  (C) $634,000,000 shall be for Advanced Scientific 
                Computing Research activities under section 606.

          Subtitle B--Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy

SEC. 621. SHORT TITLE.

  This subtitle may be cited as the ``ARPA-E Reauthorization Act of 
2010''.

SEC. 622. ARPA-E AMENDMENTS.

  Section 5012 of the America COMPETES Act (42 U.S.C. 16538) is 
amended--
          (1) in subsection (c)(2)--
                  (A) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ``and applied'' 
                after ``advances in fundamental'';
                  (B) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph 
                (B);
                  (C) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph 
                (C) and inserting ``; and''; and
                  (D) by adding at the end the following new 
                subparagraph:
                  ``(D) promoting the commercial application of 
                advanced energy technologies.'';
          (2) in subsection (e)(3), by amending subparagraph (C) to 
        read as follows:
                  ``(C) research and development of advanced 
                manufacturing process and technologies for the domestic 
                manufacturing of novel energy technologies; and'';
          (3) in subsection (e)--
                  (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph 
                (3)(D);
                  (B) by striking the period at the end of paragraph 
                (4) and inserting ``; and''; and
                  (C) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
          ``(5) pursuant to subsection (c)(2)(C)--
                  ``(A) ensuring that applications for funding disclose 
                the extent of current and prior efforts, including 
                monetary investments as appropriate, in pursuit of the 
                technology area for which funding is being requested;
                  ``(B) adopting measures to ensure that, in making 
                awards, program managers adhere to the objectives in 
                subsection (c)(2)(C); and
                  ``(C) providing as part of the annual report required 
                by subsection (h)(1) a summary of the instances of and 
                reasons for ARPA-E funding projects in technology areas 
                already being undertaken by industry.'';
          (4) by redesignating subsections (f) through (m) as 
        subsections (g), (h), (i), (j), (l), (m), (n), and (o), 
        respectively;
          (5) by inserting after subsection (e) the following new 
        subsection:
  ``(f) Awards.--In carrying out this section, the Director shall 
initiate and execute awards in the form of grants, contracts, 
cooperative agreements, cash prizes, and other transactions.'';
          (6) in subsection (g), as so redesignated by paragraph (4) of 
        this section--
                  (A) by redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as 
                paragraphs (2) and (3), respectively;
                  (B) by inserting before paragraph (2), as so 
                redesignated by subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, the 
                following new paragraph:
          ``(1) In general.--The Director shall establish and maintain 
        within ARPA-E a staff with sufficient qualifications and 
        expertise to enable ARPA-E to carry out its responsibilities 
        under this section in conjunction with the operations of the 
        rest of the Department.'';
                  (C) in paragraph (2)(A), as so redesignated by 
                subparagraph (A) of this paragraph--
                          (i) in the paragraph heading, by striking 
                        ``Program managers'' and inserting ``Program 
                        directors'';
                          (ii) by striking ``program managers'' and 
                        inserting ``program directors''; and
                          (iii) by striking ``each of''.
                  (D) in paragraph (2)(B), as so redesignated by 
                subparagraph (A) of this paragraph--
                          (i) by striking ``program manager'' and 
                        inserting ``program director'';
                          (ii) in clause (iv), by striking ``, with 
                        advice under subsection (j) as appropriate,'';
                          (iii) by redesignating clauses (v) and (vi) 
                        as clauses (vi) and (viii), respectively;
                          (iv) by inserting after clause (iv) the 
                        following new clause:
                          ``(v) identifying innovative cost-sharing 
                        arrangements for ARPA-E projects, including 
                        through use of the authority under section 
                        988(b)(3) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 
                        U.S.C. 16352(b)(3));'';
                          (v) in clause (vi), as so redesignated by 
                        clause (iii) of this subparagraph, by striking 
                        ``; and'' and inserting a semicolon; and
                          (vi) by inserting after clause (vi), as so 
                        redesignated by clause (iii) of this 
                        subparagraph, the following new clause:
                          ``(vii) identifying mechanisms for commercial 
                        application of successful energy technology 
                        development projects, including through 
                        establishment of partnerships between awardees 
                        and commercial entities; and'';
                  (E) in paragraph (2)(C), as so redesignated by 
                subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, by inserting ``up 
                to'' after ``shall be'';
                  (F) in paragraph (3), as so redesignated by 
                subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, by striking 
                subparagraph (B) and redesignating subparagraphs (C) 
                and (D) as subparagraphs (B) and (C), respectively; and
                  (G) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
          ``(4) Fellowships.--The Director is authorized to select 
        exceptional early-career and senior scientific, legal, 
        business, and technical personnel to serve as fellows to work 
        at ARPA-E for terms not to exceed two years. Responsibilities 
        of fellows may include--
                  ``(A) supporting program managers in program 
                creation, design, implementation, and management;
                  ``(B) exploring technical fields for future ARPA-E 
                program areas;
                  ``(C) assisting the Director in the creation of the 
                strategic vision for ARPA-E referred to in subsection 
                (h)(2);
                  ``(D) preparing energy technology and economic 
                analyses; and
                  ``(E) any other appropriate responsibilities 
                identified by the Director.'';
          (7) in subsection (h)(2), as so redesignated by paragraph (4) 
        of this section--
                  (A) by striking ``2008'' and inserting ``2010''; and
                  (B) by striking ``2011'' and inserting ``2013'';
          (8) by amending subsection (j), as so redesignated by 
        paragraph (4) of this section, to read as follows:
  ``(j) Federal Demonstration of Technologies.--The Director shall seek 
opportunities to partner with purchasing and procurement programs of 
Federal agencies to demonstrate energy technologies resulting from 
activities funded through ARPA-E.'';
          (9) by inserting after such subsection (j) the following new 
        subsection:
  ``(k) Events.--
          ``(1) The Director is authorized to convene, organize, and 
        sponsor events that further the objectives of ARPA-E, including 
        events that assemble awardees, the most promising applicants 
        for ARPA-E funding, and a broad range of ARPA-E stakeholders 
        (which may include members of relevant scientific research and 
        academic communities, government officials, financial 
        institutions, private investors, entrepreneurs, and other 
        private entities), for the purposes of--
                  ``(A) demonstrating projects of ARPA-E awardees;
                  ``(B) demonstrating projects of finalists for ARPA-E 
                awards and other energy technology projects;
                  ``(C) facilitating discussion of the commercial 
                application of energy technologies developed under 
                ARPA-E and other government-sponsored research and 
                development programs; or
                  ``(D) such other purposes as the Director considers 
                appropriate.
          ``(2) Funding for activities described in paragraph (1) shall 
        be provided as part of the technology transfer and outreach 
        activities authorized under subsection (o)(4)(B).'''';
          (10) in subsection (m)(1), as so redesignated by paragraph 
        (4) of this section, by striking ``4 years'' and inserting ``6 
        years'';
          (11) in subsection (m)(2)(B), as so redesignated by paragraph 
        (4) of this section, by inserting ``, and how those lessons may 
        apply to the operation of other programs within the Department 
        of Energy'' after ``ARPA-E'';
          (12) by amending subsection (o)(2), as so redesignated by 
        paragraph (4) of this section, to read as follows:
          ``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--Subject to paragraph 
        (4), there are authorized to be appropriated to the Director 
        for deposit in the Fund, without fiscal year limitation--
                  ``(A) $300,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
                  ``(B) $450,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
                  ``(C) $600,000,000 for fiscal year 2013;
                  ``(D) $800,000,000 for fiscal year 2014; and
                  ``(E) $1,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2015.'';
          (13) in subsection (o), as so redesignated by paragraph (4) 
        of this section, by--
                  (A) striking paragraph (4); and
                  (B) redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (4); and
          (14) in subsection (o)(4)(B), as so redesignated by 
        paragraphs (4) and (13)(B) of this subsection--
                  (A) by striking ``2.5 percent'' and inserting ``5 
                percent''; and
                  (B) by inserting ``, consistent with the goal 
                described in subsection (c)(2)(D) and within the 
                responsibilities of program directors as specified in 
                subsection (g)(2)(B)(vii)'' after ``outreach 
                activities''.

                   Subtitle C--Energy Innovation Hubs

SEC. 631. SHORT TITLE.

  This subtitle may be cited as the ``Energy Innovation Hubs 
Authorization Act of 2010''.

SEC. 632. ENERGY INNOVATION HUBS.

  (a) Establishment of Program.--
          (1) In general.--The Secretary of Energy shall carry out a 
        program to enhance the Nation's economic, environmental, and 
        energy security by making grants to consortia for establishing 
        and operating Energy Innovation Hubs to conduct and support, 
        whenever practicable at one centralized location, 
        multidisciplinary, collaborative research, development, 
        demonstration, and commercial application of advanced energy 
        technologies in areas not being served by the private sector.
          (2) Technology development focus.--The Secretary shall 
        designate for each Hub a unique advanced energy technology 
        development focus.
          (3) Coordination.--The Secretary shall ensure the 
        coordination of, and avoid unnecessary duplication of, the 
        activities of Hubs with those of other Department of Energy 
        research entities, including the National Laboratories, the 
        Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy, and Energy Frontier 
        Research Centers, and within industry. Such coordination shall 
        include convening and consulting with representatives of staff 
        of the Department of Energy, representatives from Hubs and the 
        qualifying entities that are members of the consortia operating 
        the Hubs, and representatives of such other entities as the 
        Secretary considers appropriate, to share research results, 
        program plans, and opportunities for collaboration.
          (4) Administration.--The Secretary shall administer this 
        section with respect to each Hub through the Department program 
        office appropriate to administer the subject matter of the 
        technology development focus assigned under paragraph (2) for 
        the Hub.
  (b) Consortia.--
          (1) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
        this section for the establishment and operation of a Hub, a 
        consortium shall--
                  (A) be composed of no fewer than 2 qualifying 
                entities;
                  (B) operate subject to a binding agreement entered 
                into by its members that documents--
                          (i) the proposed partnership agreement, 
                        including the governance and management 
                        structure of the Hub;
                          (ii) measures to enable cost-effective 
                        implementation of the program under this 
                        section;
                          (iii) a proposed budget, including financial 
                        contributions from non-Federal sources;
                          (iv) conflict of interest procedures 
                        consistent with subsection (d)(3), all known 
                        material conflicts of interest, and 
                        corresponding mitigation plans;
                          (v) an accounting structure that enables the 
                        Secretary to ensure that the consortium has 
                        complied with the requirements of this section; 
                        and
                          (vi) an external advisory committee 
                        consistent with subsection (d)(2); and
                  (C) operate as a nonprofit organization.
          (2) Application.--A consortium seeking to establish and 
        operate a Hub under this section, acting through a prime 
        applicant, shall transmit to the Secretary an application at 
        such time, in such form, and accompanied by such information as 
        the Secretary shall require, including a detailed description 
        of the elements of the consortium agreement required under 
        paragraph (1)(B). If the consortium members will not be located 
        at one centralized location, such application shall include a 
        communications plan that ensures close coordination and 
        integration of the Hub's activities.
  (c) Selection and Schedule.--The Secretary shall select consortia for 
grants for the establishment and operation of Hubs through competitive 
selection processes. Grants made to a Hub shall be for a period not to 
exceed 5 years, after which the grant may be renewed, subject to a 
competitive selection process.
  (d) Hub Operations.--
          (1) In general.--Hubs shall conduct or provide for 
        multidisciplinary, collaborative research, development, 
        demonstration, and commercial application of advanced energy 
        technologies within the technology development focus designated 
        for the Hub by the Secretary under subsection (a)(2). Each Hub 
        shall--
                  (A) encourage collaboration and communication among 
                the member qualifying entities of the consortium and 
                awardees by conducting activities whenever practicable 
                at one centralized location;
                  (B) develop and publish on the Department of Energy's 
                website proposed plans and programs;
                  (C) submit an annual report to the Secretary 
                summarizing the Hub's activities, including detailing 
                organizational expenditures, listing external advisory 
                committee members, and describing each project 
                undertaken by the Hub; and
                  (D) monitor project implementation and coordination.
          (2) External advisory committee.--Each Hub shall establish an 
        external advisory committee, the membership of which shall have 
        sufficient expertise to advise and provide guidance on 
        scientific, technical, industry, financial, and research 
        management matters.
          (3) Conflicts of interest.--
                  (A) Procedures.--Hubs shall establish conflict of 
                interest procedures, consistent with those of the 
                Department of Energy, to ensure that employees and 
                consortia designees for Hub activities who are in 
                decisionmaking capacities disclose all material 
                conflicts of interest, including financial, 
                organizational, and personal conflicts of interest.
                  (B) Disqualification and revocation.--The Secretary 
                may disqualify an application or revoke funds 
                distributed to a Hub if the Secretary discovers a 
                failure to comply with conflict of interest procedures 
                established under subparagraph (A).
  (e) Prohibition on Construction.--
          (1) In general.--No funds provided pursuant to this section 
        may be used for construction of new buildings or facilities for 
        Hubs. Construction of new buildings or facilities shall not be 
        considered as part of the non-Federal share of a Hub cost-
        sharing agreement.
          (2) Test bed and renovation exception.--Nothing in this 
        subsection shall prohibit the use of funds provided pursuant to 
        this section, or non-Federal cost share funds, for the 
        construction of a test bed or renovations to existing buildings 
        or facilities for the purposes of research if the Oversight 
        Board determines that the test bed or renovations are limited 
        to a scope and scale necessary for the research to be 
        conducted.
  (f) Oversight Board.--The Secretary shall establish and maintain 
within the Department an Oversight Board to oversee the progress of 
Hubs.
  (g) Priority Consideration.--The Secretary shall give priority 
consideration to applications in which 1 or more of the institutions 
under subsection (b)(1)(A) are 1890 Land Grant Institutions (as defined 
in section 2 of the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Education 
Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7061)), Predominantly Black Institutions 
(as defined in section 318 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
U.S.C. 1059e)), Tribal Colleges or Universities (as defined in section 
316(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059c(b)), or 
Hispanic Serving Institutions (as defined in section 318 of the Higher 
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059e)).
  (h) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
          (1) Advanced energy technology.--The term ``advanced energy 
        technology'' means an innovative technology--
                  (A) that produces energy from solar, wind, 
                geothermal, biomass, tidal, wave, ocean, or other 
                renewable energy resources;
                  (B) that produces nuclear energy;
                  (C) for carbon capture and sequestration;
                  (D) that enables advanced vehicles, vehicle 
                components, and related technologies that result in 
                significant energy savings;
                  (E) that generates, transmits, distributes, utilizes, 
                or stores energy more efficiently than conventional 
                technologies; or
                  (F) that enhances the energy independence and 
                security of the United States by enabling improved or 
                expanded supply and production of domestic energy 
                resources, including coal, oil, and natural gas.
          (2) Hub.--The term ``Hub'' means an Energy Innovation Hub 
        established in accordance with this section.
          (3) Institution of higher education.--The term ``institution 
        of higher education'' has the meaning given that term in 
        section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
        1001(a)).
          (4) Qualifying entity.--The term ``qualifying entity'' 
        means--
                  (A) an institution of higher education;
                  (B) an appropriate State or Federal entity, including 
                the Department of Energy Federally Funded Research and 
                Development Centers;
                  (C) a nongovernmental organization with expertise in 
                advanced energy technology research, development, 
                demonstration, or commercial application; or
                  (D) any other relevant entity the Secretary considers 
                appropriate.
          (5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of 
        Energy.
  (i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be 
appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section--
          (1) $110,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
          (2) $135,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
          (3) $195,000,000 for fiscal year 2013;
          (4) $210,000,000 for fiscal year 2014; and
          (5) $210,000,000 for fiscal year 2015.

         Subtitle D--Cooperative Research and Development Fund

SEC. 641. SHORT TITLE.

  This subtitle may be cited as the ``Cooperative Research and 
Development Fund Authorization Act of 2010''.

SEC. 642. COOPERATIVE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FUND.

  (a) In General.--The Secretary of Energy shall make funds available 
to Department of Energy National Laboratories for the Federal share of 
cooperative research and development agreements. The Secretary of 
Energy shall determine the apportionment of such funds to each 
Department of Energy National Laboratory and shall ensure that special 
consideration is given to small business firms and consortia involving 
small business firms in the selection process for which cooperative 
research and development agreements will receive such funds.
  (b) Reporting.--Each year the Secretary shall submit to Congress a 
report that describes how funds were expended under this subtitle.
  (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be 
appropriated to the Secretary such sums as are necessary to carry out 
this section each fiscal year. No funds allocated for this section 
shall come from funds allocated for the Office of Science.

                        TITLE VII--MISCELLANEOUS

SEC. 701. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

  It is the sense of Congress that, among the programs and activities 
authorized in this Act, those that correspond to the recommendations of 
the National Academy of Sciences' 2005 report entitled ``Rising Above 
the Gathering Storm'' remain critical to maintaining long-term United 
States economic competitiveness, and accordingly shall receive funding 
priority.

SEC. 702. PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES.

  For the purposes of the activities and programs supported by this Act 
and the amendments made by this Act, institutions of higher education 
chartered to serve large numbers of students with disabilities, 
including Gallaudet University, Landmark College, and the National 
Technical Institute for the Deaf and those with programs serving or 
those serving disabled veterans, shall receive special consideration 
and have a designation consistent with the designation for other 
institutions that serve populations underrepresented in STEM to ensure 
that institutions of higher education chartered to or serving persons 
with disabilities benefit from such activities and programs.

SEC. 703. VETERANS AND SERVICE MEMBERS.

  In awarding scholarships and fellowships under this Act, an 
institution of higher education shall give preference to applications 
from veterans and service members, including those who have received or 
will receive the Afghanistan Campaign Medal or the Iraq Campaign Medal 
as authorized by Public Law 108-234 (10 U.S.C. 1121 note; 118 Stat. 
655) and Executive Order No. 13363.

                                I. Bill


                        II. Purpose of the Bill

    The purpose of the bill is to invest in innovation through 
research and development and to improve the competitiveness of 
the United States. It reauthorizes the National Science 
Foundation, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, 
the Department of Energy's Office of Science, and the Advanced 
Projects Agency--Energy at the Department of Energy. The bill 
also authorizes new innovation-focused programs at the 
Department of Commerce and an energy innovation hub program at 
the Department of Energy.

              III. Background and Need for the Legislation


                 TITLE I--SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY


       Subtitle A--National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments

    The Science and Technology Committee was instrumental in 
the development and enactment of the 21st Century 
Nanotechnology Research and Development Act of 2003 (P.L. 108-
153), which authorizes the interagency National Nanotechnology 
Initiative (NNI). The 2003 statute put in place formal 
interagency planning, budgeting, and coordinating mechanisms 
for NNI. The National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), 
through the Nanoscale Science, Engineering, and Technology 
(NSET) Subcommittee, plans and coordinates the NNI, and the 
National Nanotechnology Coordination Office (NNCO) provides 
technical and administrative support to the NSET. There are 
currently twenty-five Federal agencies that participate in the 
NNI, with 15 of those agencies reporting a nanotechnology 
research and development budget. The total NNI budget proposed 
for fiscal year 2011 is $1.76 billion.
    P.L. 108-153 also provides for formal reviews of the 
content and management of the program by the National Academy 
of Sciences and by the NNI Advisory Panel, a statutorily 
created advisory committee of non-government experts. These 
reviews have found that the coordination and planning processes 
among the participating agencies in the NNI are largely 
effective. However, the formal reviews by external experts 
noted above, as well as the findings of the Committee's 
oversight hearings on the NNI, have identified aspects of the 
interagency program that could be strengthened and improved. 
These areas are environmental, health and safety research; 
technology transfer and the fostering of commercialization of 
research results; and educational activities.

    Subtitle B--Networking and Information Technology Research and 
                              Development

    The NITRD program, originally authorized in the High 
Performance Computing Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-194), is a multi-
agency research effort to accelerate progress in the 
advancement of computing and networking technologies and to 
support leading edge computational research in a range of 
science and engineering fields. The 1991 statute established a 
set of mechanisms and procedures to provide for interagency 
planning, coordination, and budgeting of R&D activities carried 
out under the program. The NITRD Subcommittee of the NSTC is 
the working body for interagency planning and coordination and 
includes representatives from each of the participating NITRD 
agencies as well as the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
and the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). In 
fiscal year 2011 the 13 Federal agencies involved in the NITRD 
program requested a total budget of $4.26 billion.
    In August 2007, PCAST completed an assessment of the NITRD 
program and issued a report entitled, Leadership Under 
Challenge: Information Technology R&D in a Competitive World. 
The report indicates that while the U.S. remains the global 
leader in NIT, several countries, including China and India, 
are investing heavily in R&D and higher education. PCAST found 
that while the NITRD program has been effective at addressing 
the IT needs of the Federal agencies and the Nation, a number 
of changes are necessary to guarantee continued U.S. leadership 
in networking and information technology. Specifically, PCAST 
recommended improvements in the program's planning, 
prioritization and coordination functions; a rebalancing of the 
investment portfolio toward long-term, large-scale R&D; 
adjustments to the research content of the program; and a focus 
on workforce training through improved NIT education.

                   Subtitle C--Other OSTP Provisions

    Science and technology have become increasingly more 
important in the national decision-making process, but the 
complexity of such issues requires long-term planning and 
coordination, as well as immediate program development and 
action. OSTP, often acting through the NSTC, plays a central 
role in guiding the course of the Nation's scientific 
enterprise. The need to establish a long-term, interagency 
vision for the preservation of Federal scientific collections, 
manufacturing research and development, and public access to 
federally funded research has emerged.

                 TITLE II--NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

    NSF is an independent Federal agency created by the 
National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (P.L. 81-507). NSF's 
mission is unique among the Federal government's scientific 
research agencies in that it is to support science and 
engineering across all disciplines. NSF currently funds 
research and education activities at more than 1,900 
universities, colleges, and other public and private 
institutions throughout the United States, supporting more than 
240,000 researchers, postdoctoral fellows, teachers, students 
and trainees. Virtually all of this support is provided through 
competitive, merit-reviewed grants and cooperative agreements. 
Although NSF's research and development budget accounts for 
only about three percent of all federally funded research, the 
role of NSF in promoting fundamental research is vital to the 
Nation's scientific research enterprise, as NSF provides 
approximately 20 percent of the Federal support for basic 
research conducted at academic institutions.
    Basic research pays enormous dividends to society. Economic 
growth, public health, national defense, and social advancement 
have all been tied to technological developments resulting from 
research and development. The Administration's Strategy for 
American Innovation, recognizes the importance of investing in 
fundamental research and STEM education as the basis for 
sustainable economic growth, and has the goal of increasing the 
amount of the Nation's gross domestic product spent on research 
and development to 3 percent.
    NSF has a central role to play in a national innovation 
strategy and needs to see steady growth over the long-term to 
maximize the agency's potential contribution to the research 
enterprise. NSF is currently able to fund only about 25 percent 
of the grant proposals received each year because of limited 
funds; in some directorates, the percentage of grant proposals 
funded is as low as 10 percent. The $3 billion received in the 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (P.L. 111-5) allowed NSF 
to fund a large number of previously declined, but highly rated 
proposals, raising NSF's grant funding rate to 32 percent, the 
highest level since 2000. While the one-time investment in NSF 
through the Recovery Act was critical to keeping the scientific 
enterprise thriving and the brightest young people in the 
innovation pipeline, sustained growth will be necessary to 
maintain gains and in order to ensure future economic growth, 
and to strengthen homeland defense and national security.
    NSF was most recently authorized by the 2007 America 
COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69), which authorized appropriations for 
NSF for FY 2008 through FY 2010. In addition to continuing 
authorizations of appropriations for five more years, several 
policy and administrative issues--including ones related to the 
Foundation's responsibilities for funding high-risk, high 
reward research, for supporting and spurring innovation, for 
supporting postdoctoral research fellowships, for funding STEM 
education programs, for broadening participation in STEM, and 
for implementing clear guidelines for the broader impacts 
review criterion--have arisen since the last authorization 
bill.

                       TITLE III--STEM EDUCATION

    A consensus exists that improving science, technology, 
engineering, and math (STEM) education throughout the Nation is 
a necessary condition for preserving the U.S.'s capacity for 
innovation and discovery and for ensuring the nation's economic 
strength and competitiveness. A variety of STEM education 
programs and activities exist for K-16 students and teachers at 
the Federal research and development agencies. For the most 
part, agencies have developed their programs independently and 
without a strategic plan for accomplishing a set of overarching 
goals and objectives. Furthermore, each program, if it has been 
evaluated at all, utilizes a unique method of evaluation, 
making comparison of effectiveness across the programs 
impossible. Finally, the agencies have at times had trouble 
building widespread awareness of their programs among teachers 
and other practitioners. Many of the witnesses at the Research 
and Science Education Subcommittee hearings held in the 110th 
Congress testified that there is a need for improved 
interagency and intra-agency coordination of Federal STEM 
education efforts in order to better communicate best practices 
and eliminate inefficiencies.
    In addition, several recent and high-profile reports have 
underscored the need to drastically improve STEM education in 
the United States, including: the National Academies' Rising 
above the Gathering Storm; the National Science Board's, A 
National Action Plan for Addressing the Critical Needs of the 
U.S. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics 
Education System; and the Carnegie-IAS Commission on 
Mathematics and Science Education's, Opportunity Equation. A 
key recommendation of the Board's action plan was the creation 
of a Committee on STEM Education under the National Science and 
Technology Council responsible for coordinating STEM education 
programs across Federal science agencies and the Department of 
Education.
    In addition to the need for increased collaboration and 
communication among the agencies, many witnesses before the 
Committee and other stakeholders have suggested that agency 
activities need to be better aligned with the needs of STEM 
educators and state and local education agencies. Many have 
also called for increased coordination between Federal and non-
Federal STEM education initiatives. The 2007 National Science 
Board report called for the establishment of a body that would 
facilitate improved communication and coordination between the 
Federal government and various public and private STEM 
education stakeholders.

        TITLE IV--NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY

    In NIST's Organic Act (P.L. 56-177), Congress directed NIST 
to work on ``the solution of problems which arise in connection 
with standards'' and to engage in the ``determination of 
physical constants and the properties of materials, when such 
data are of great importance to scientific or manufacturing 
interests and are not to be obtained of sufficient accuracy 
elsewhere.''
    In its implementation of this almost endless scope of work, 
NIST has been a key central component in the U.S. Government's 
efforts to stimulate innovation, competitiveness, and in turn, 
job creation. Since 1901, NIST has made key contributions to 
the development of integrated circuits, DNA diagnostic testing, 
digitized fingerprints, laser technology, closed-caption 
television, cholesterol testing, and cybersecurity, to name 
just a few. The Committee fully expects that NIST will make 
equally significant contributions in the next 100 years. Given 
its original Congressional mandate and its subsequent record, a 
NIST authorization was an important component of the America 
COMPETES Act (P.L. 110-69).
    The original COMPETES legislation included the first 
comprehensive authorization of NIST in 15 years. That bill put 
funding for NIST's labs and the Manufacturing Extension 
Partnership (MEP) program on a 10-year doubling path. It also 
replaced the 20-year-old Advanced Technology Program (ATP) with 
the Technology Innovation Program (TIP) to focus on small, 
high-tech, entrepreneurial firms and to encourage partnerships 
between these firms and universities.
    However, the NIST authorization in the first COMPETES bill 
largely maintained the status quo at NIST. In the face of 
accelerating global competition in innovation and 
competitiveness, NIST programs and structure need to reflect 
this new reality. It is the Committee's responsibility to 
ensure that NIST continues to support the innovation in the 
sciences and manufacturing.

                          TITLE V--INNOVATION

    In recent years, there have been increased calls for the 
Federal Government to be more active and engaged in efforts to 
foster innovation in the United States, and to do a better job 
at coordinating the innovation activities of the Federal 
Government. The Secretary of Commerce recently announced the 
intent to establish an Office of Innovation and 
Entrepreneurship at the Department of Commerce to help answer 
these calls, but the Office has not been statutorily 
authorized. Along these same lines, there has been much 
discussion about the need for the Federal Government to be more 
involved in efforts to empower local communities to develop 
innovation strategies, including through the development of 
innovation clusters, to spur innovation at a regional level.
    There is also widespread recognition that there is a need 
for small- and medium-sized manufacturers to retool themselves 
and innovate in order to remain competitive in the 21st 
century. The ability of small- and medium-sized manufacturers 
to implement innovative technologies in manufacturing is often 
limited, particularly by limited access to the capital 
necessary to retool. Many have encouraged the Federal 
Government to explore ways to ensure that small- and medium-
sized manufacturers have the capital they need for these 
purposes.

                     TITLE VI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


                     Subtitle A--Office of Science

    Among its many recommendations the panel concluded that the 
government should increase its investment in its basic research 
portfolio, with special attention on the physical sciences, 
engineering, mathematics and the information sciences. The 
COMPETES Act followed on the panel's recommendations by setting 
the Department of Energy's Office of Science budget on a path 
to double in 7 years, along with the National Science 
Foundation and the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology. This follows roughly the funding trajectory set by 
the Energy Policy Act of 2005 by extending the authorizations 
an additional year to include fiscal year 2010. However, beyond 
an authorization of appropriations, the COMPETES Act did not 
include any program guidance for the Office of Science. While 
such guidance was provided for select Office of Science 
research areas within the Energy Policy Act 2005, as well as 
the Department of Energy High-End Computing Revitalization Act 
of 2004, to date the Office of Science has never had 
comprehensive statutory guidance for its major research 
programs.
    The Office of Science is the single largest supporter of 
basic research in the physical sciences in the United States 
with a current budget of roughly $5 billion, and manages 10 of 
the Department of Energy's 17 laboratories. Created over a 
half-century ago, the national laboratory system is a major 
component of the nation's research infrastructure. The ten 
Office of Science laboratories are:
    
 Ames Laboratory (Ames, IA).
    
 Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne, IL).
    
 Brookhaven National Laboratory (Upton, NY).
    
 Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Batavia, 
IL).
    
 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley, 
CA).
    
 Oak Ridge National Laboratory (Oak Ridge, TN).
    
 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (Richland, 
WA).
    
 Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (Princeton, 
NJ).
    
 Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (Stanford, CA).
    
 Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility 
(Newport News, VA).
    The Office of Science oversees the construction and 
operation of some of the Nation's most advanced research and 
development user facilities, located at national laboratories 
and universities. These include supercomputers, particle 
accelerators, and x-ray light sources and neutron scattering 
facilities that enable the examination of materials and 
chemical processes for a wide range of industrial and basic 
energy research applications. In the 2009 fiscal year, these 
facilities were used by more than 22,000 researchers from 
universities, national laboratories, private industry, and 
other federal science agencies.
    The Office of Science is a principal supporter of graduate 
students and postdoctoral researchers early in their careers. 
About a third of its research funding goes to support research 
at more than 300 colleges and universities nationwide. In 
addition, about half the users at user facilities are from 
colleges and universities. The Office of Science makes 
extensive use of peer review and federal advisory committees to 
develop general directions for research investments, to 
identify priorities, and to determine the best scientific 
proposals to support.

         Subtitle B--Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy

    The Gathering Storm panel called on the federal government 
to create a new energy research agency (ARPA-E) within 
Department of Energy, patterned after the successful Defense 
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) within the Department 
of Defense. According to the Gathering Storm report, ARPA-E 
should be structured to:

        ``. . . sponsor creative, out-of-the-box, 
        transformational, generic energy research in those 
        areas where industry by itself cannot or will not 
        undertake such sponsorships, where risks and potential 
        payoffs are high, and where success could provide 
        dramatic benefits for the Nation. . . . It would be 
        designed as a lean, effective, and agile--but largely 
        independent--organization that can start and stop 
        targeted programs based on performance and ultimate 
        relevance.''

    The COMPETES Act of 2007 directed the Secretary of Energy 
to establish ARPA-E, and provided basic programmatic structure 
and guidance for the program. However, since funding from the 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 ($400 million) 
and the Fiscal Year 2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act ($15 
million) allowed for the establishment of ARPA-E, fiscal year 
2010 will be the first full year of operation for the new 
program.
    ARPA-E borrows from the DARPA model in a number of ways 
that are intended to provide for agile management and rapid 
execution of high-risk, high-reward technology projects. Both 
utilize a flat reporting structure--the Director of ARPA-E 
reports directly to the Secretary of Energy--and both rely on a 
small team of highly technically qualified individuals to serve 
limited terms as Program Directors. Program Directors are given 
extraordinary resources and authority to make technical 
decisions, select research performers outside of the standard 
peer review process, and to carry successful projects through 
commercial application of the technology. The Director of ARPA-
E may also exercise flexible hiring authority to quickly 
recruit these and other essential staff, and to compensate them 
at levels above standard federal pay scales. To attract non-
traditional performers and negotiate intellectual property 
agreements ARPA-E also uses flexible contracting mechanisms 
called Technology Investment Agreements authorized for the 
Department as ``Other Transactions Authority'' in the Energy 
Policy Act of 2005.
    To date, ARPA-E has issued three Funding Opportunity 
Announcements (FOA), and received applications for thousands of 
projects. Approximately 3700 concept papers were submitted for 
the first round of funding and, of those, 37 projects were 
ultimately chosen for awards. For that round, ARPA-E 
successfully completed awards within two months, which is 
considered by many to be a rapid pace for federal contracting. 
Second round FOA winners were announced in April, and it is 
expected that this and subsequent rounds will follow a similar 
pace for project selection and contracting.
    Recognizing the high volume of applicants as evidence of a 
pent-up demand that exceeds the resources of ARPA-E, the 
Secretary held an ARPA-E Innovation Summit in early March of 
2010. The Summit provided a forum for ARPA-E project awardees, 
finalists and others to exhibit their technology proposals, and 
for technology industries, the financial sector, academia and 
policymakers to discuss challenges faced in the development and 
adoption of advanced energy technologies. It is expected that 
ARPA-E will hold similar events in the future.
    The COMPETES Act authorized appropriations for ARPA-E for 
fiscal years 2008 through 2010. In addition to extending 
authorizations, lessons learned in ARPA-E's first year indicate 
that further programmatic guidance is needed to ensure that it 
operates as the independent and agile program envisioned by the 
Gathering Storm panel and authorized by Congress in the 
COMPETES Act.

                   Subtitle C--Energy Innovation Hubs

    As part of a larger effort to strengthen the role of the 
federal energy research enterprise as an instrument of U.S. 
technological innovation and economic growth, a number of new 
models for research have emerged. In the rollout of the FY 2010 
budget request Secretary Chu announced the Administration's 
proposal to establish a system of Energy Innovation Hubs, 
modeled on the Bioenergy Research Centers established under the 
previous Administration. No statutory authorization exists 
specifically for Energy Innovation Hubs.
    To accelerate scientific and technological solutions to 
certain grand energy challenges, an Energy Innovation Hub, as 
described by the Secretary, will comprise a highly 
collaborative team spanning many disciplines including science, 
engineering, economics, and public policy ideally, but not 
exclusively, working together under one roof. This is similar 
to the model of the Manhattan Project, which developed the 
atomic bomb, and the legendary Bell Laboratories, where the 
invention of the transistor and the development of information 
theory, among other things, helped make possible the 
semiconductor industry and the Internet.
    Secretary Chu identified the following eight scientific 
areas as particularly resistant to the standard DOE research 
and development approach and thus appropriate for the focus of 
a Hub: (1) Fuels from Sunlight; (2) Nuclear Fuel Management; 
(3) Energy Efficient Building Systems; (4) Batteries and Energy 
Storage; (5) Solar Electricity; (6) Novel Carbon Capture and 
Storage; (7) Modeling and Simulation for Nuclear Reactors; and 
(8) Electrical Grid Systems.
    The Administration requested $280 million for FY2010 for 
the Hubs program with each Hub being funded $25 million per 
year over five years and an additional $10 million in the first 
year for start up costs. The funding was to be awarded on the 
basis of external peer-review of proposals submitted in 
response to a funding opportunity announcement (FOA), and 
awards contingent upon finalization and approval of DOE's 
FY2010 budget. However, Appropriators funded only three of the 
Hubs requested by the administration at $22 million each which 
included Fuels from Sunlight, Energy Efficient Buildings and 
Modeling and Simulation for Nuclear Reactors. In the 
President's FY2011 budget request, there is an additional 
funding request for the Batteries and Energy Storage Hub.

                          IV. Hearing Summary

    During the 110th and 111th Congresses, the House Committee 
on Science and Technology held 33 hearings relevant to the 
activities authorized in the bill.
    On May 15, 2007, the Subcommittee on Research and Science 
Education held a hearing entitled ``Federal STEM Education 
Programs; Educators' Perspective''. The purpose of the hearing 
was to inform the Subcommittee of educators' experiences 
working science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) 
education programs for K-16 students supported by federal R & D 
mission agencies and explore whether such issues as the lack of 
coordination between the agencies, difficulty by educators in 
finding information about the programs, and the absence of 
robust evaluation techniques hinder the potential of the 
Federal programs. Witnesses included: (1) Dr. Linda Froschauer, 
President, National Science Teachers Association; (2) Mr. 
Michael Lach, Director of Mathematics and Science, Chicago 
Public Schools; (3) Dr. George D. Nelson, Director, Science, 
Technology, and Mathematics Education, Western Washington 
University; (4) Mr. Van Reiner, President, Maryland Science 
Center; and (5) Dr. Iris Weiss, President, Horizon Research, 
Inc.
    On June 6, 2007, the Subcommittee on Research and Science 
Education held a hearing entitled ``Federal STEM Education 
Programs''. The purpose of the hearing was to review the K-16 
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) 
education activities of federal agencies and to explore current 
efforts for the improvement of interagency coordination and 
evaluation of programs. Witnesses included (1) Dr. Cora 
Marrett, Assistant Director, Directorate for Education and 
Human Resources, National Science Foundation and Co-Chair, 
Education and Workforce Development Subcommittee, National 
Science and Technology Council; (2) Dr. Joyce Winterton, 
Assistant Administrator, Office of Education, National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration; (3) Mr. William Valdez, 
Director, Office of Workforce Development for Teachers and 
Scientists, Office of Science, Department of Energy; and (4) 
Dr. Bruce Fuchs, Director, Office of Science Education, 
National Institutes of Health.
    On October 10, 2007, the Subcommittee on Research and 
Science Education held a hearing entitled ``Assessment of the 
National Science Board's Action Plan for STEM Education''. The 
purpose of the hearing was to receive testimony on the National 
Science Board's recommendations for bringing greater coherence 
to the Nation's STEM education system, as laid out in their 
report, ``A National Action Plan for Addressing the Critical 
Needs of the U.S. Science, Technology, Engineering, and 
Mathematics Education System.'' Witnesses included: (1) Dr. 
Steven Beering, Chairman, National Science Board; (2) Ms. Judy 
A. Jeffrey, Director, Iowa Department of Education and 
Representing the Council of Chief State School Officers; (3) 
Dr. Francis (Skip) Fennell, President, National Council of 
Teachers of Mathematics and Professor of Education at McDaniel 
College; (4) Ms. Chrisanne Gayl, Director of Federal Programs, 
National School Boards Association; (5) Dr. Robert Semper, 
Executive Associate Director, The Exploratorium and 
Representing the Association of Science-Technology Centers; and 
(6) Ms. Susan L. Traiman, Director, Education and Workforce 
Policy Business Roundtable.
    On April 16, 2008, the Committee on Science and Technology 
held a hearing entitled ``The National Nanotechnology 
Initiative Amendments Act of 2008''. The purpose of the hearing 
was to review legislation that proposes changes to various 
aspects of the planning and implementation mechanisms for and 
to the content of the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). 
Witnesses included: (1) Mr. Floyd E. Kvamme, Co-Chair, 
President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology; (2) 
Mr. Sean Murdock, Executive Director, NanoBusiness Alliance; 
(3) Dr. Joseph Krajcik, Associate Dean for Research and 
Professor of Education, University of Michigan; (4) Dr. Andrew 
Maynard, Chief Science Advisor, Project on Emerging 
Nanotechnologies, Woodrow Wilson Center; (5) Dr. Raymond Davis, 
Manager of Toxicology, BASF Corporation on behalf of the 
American Chemistry Council; and (6) Dr. Robert R. Doering, 
Senior Fellow and Research Strategy Manager, Texas Instruments 
and on behalf of the Semiconductor Industry Association.
    On May 8, 2008, the Subcommittee on Research and Science 
Education held a hearing to receive comments on a discussion 
draft of the Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic 
Science and Engineering Act of 2008. The Subcommittee heard 
from three witnesses that included: (1) Dr. Lynda T. Carlson, 
Director, Division of Science Resource Statistics, Directorate 
for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences, National Science 
Foundation; (2) Dr. Linda G. Blevins, Senior Technical Advisor, 
Office of the Deputy Director for Science Programs, Office of 
Science, Department of Energy; and (3) Dr. Donna K. Ginther, 
Associate Professor of Economics and Director of the Center for 
Economic and Business Analysis, Institute for Policy Research, 
University of Kansas.
    On July 31, 2008, the Committee on Science and Technology 
held a hearing entitled ``Oversight of the Networking and 
Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD) 
Program'' The purpose of the hearing was to review the multi-
agency, coordinated Networking and Information Technology 
Research and Development (NITRD) program and examine the 
program in light of the assessment of the President's Council 
of Advisors on Science and Technology and explore whether 
additional legislative adjustments to the program were needed. 
Witnesses included: (1) Dr. Chris Greer, Director, NITRD 
National Coordination Office; (2) Dr. Daniel A. Reed, Director 
of Scalable and Multicore Computing, Microsoft; (3) Dr. Craig 
Stewart, Associate Dean, Research Technologies, Indiana 
University, and representing the Coalition for Academic 
Scientific Computing; and (4) Mr. Don C. Winter, Vice 
President--Engineering and Information Technology, Phantom 
Works, the Boeing Company.
    On September 10, 2008, the Subcommittee on Energy and 
Environment held a hearing entitled ``The Foundation for 
Developing New Energy Technologies: Basic Energy Research in 
the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science.'' The hearing 
examined the Basic Energy Sciences program in DOE's Office of 
Science, with a focus on stewardship of the major light and 
neutron source facilities as well as its initiatives to advance 
research for specific energy applications. Witnesses included: 
(1) Dr. Patricia Dehmer, Deputy Director of Science for the DOE 
Office of Science; (2) Dr. Steven Dierker, Associate Laboratory 
Director for Light Sources at Brookhaven National Laboratory; 
(3) Dr. Ernest Hall, Chief Scientist for Chemistry Technologies 
and Materials Characterization at GE Global Research; and (4) 
Dr. Thomas Russell, Professor of Polymer Science and 
Engineering at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and 
Director of its Materials Research Science and Engineering 
Center on Polymers.
    On February 26, 2009, the Subcommittee on Research and 
Science Education held a hearing entitled ``Beyond the 
Classroom: Informal STEM Education''. The purpose of the 
hearing was to examine the role of informal environments in 
promoting STEM learning, including the potential for informal 
STEM learning to engage students in math and science in ways 
that traditional formal learning environments cannot and ways 
in which informal STEM education can complement and enhance 
classroom STEM studies. The witnesses included: (1) Dr. Joan 
Ferrini-Mundy, Division Director, Division of Research on 
Learning in Formal and Informal Settings, Education and Human 
Resources Directorate, National Science Foundation; (2) Dr. 
Phillip Bell, Professor, College of Education, the University 
of Washington, Seattle; (3) Ms. Andrea Ingram, Vice President 
of Education and Guest Experiences, Museum of Science and 
Industry-Chicago; (4) Mr. Robert Lippincott, Senior Vice 
President for Education, the Public Broadcasting Service; and 
(5) Dr. Alejandro Grajal, Senior Vice President of 
Conservation, Education, and Training, the Chicago Zoological 
Society.
    On March 17, 2009, the Committee on Science and Technology 
held a hearing entitled ``New Directions for Energy Research 
and Development at the U.S. Department of Energy.'' The purpose 
of the hearing was to receive testimony from Secretary of 
Energy Steven Chu on the Administration's near-term objectives 
and priority issues for the research and development (R&D) 
activities under the Offices of Science, Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy, Fossil Energy, Nuclear Energy, Electricity 
Delivery and Energy Reliability, and the Loan Guarantee 
Program, as well as the Advanced Research Projects Agency--
Energy. In addition, the hearing included testimony on the 
proposed Energy Innovation Hubs and how they differ from 
existing DOE programs.
    On April 1, 2009, the Committee on Science and Technology 
held a hearing to receive testimony on the Networking and 
Information Technology Research and Development Act of 2009. 
Witnesses included: (1) Dr. Chris L. Greer, Director, National 
Coordination Office for Networking and Information Technology 
Research and Development; (2) Dr. Peter Lee, Professor and 
Head, Computer Science Department, Carnegie Mellon University; 
(3) Dr. Armit Yoran, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, 
NetWitness Corporation; and (4) Dr. Deborah Estrin, Director, 
Center for Embedded Networked Sensing, University of 
California, Los Angeles.
    On April 22, 2009, the Committee on Science and Technology 
held a hearing entitled ``Monitoring, Measurement and 
Verification of Greenhouse Gas Emissions II: The Role of 
Federal and Academic Research and Monitoring Programs.'' The 
hearing examined existing and planned federal programs focused 
on monitoring, measuring, and verifying sources and sinks of 
greenhouse gases, their atmospheric chemistry and their impacts 
on Earth's climate. Witnesses included: (1) Dr. Alexander 
``Sandy'' MacDonald, Director, Earth Systems Research 
Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; 
(2) Dr. Beverly Law, Professor, Global Change Forest Science, 
Oregon State University and Science Chair, AmeriFlux Network; 
(3) Dr. Richard Birdsey, Project Leader, Climate, Fire, and 
Carbon Cycle Science, USDA Forest Service, and Chair, Carbon 
Cycle Scientific Steering Group; (4) Dr. Michael Freilich, 
Director, Earth Science Division, National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration; and (5) Ms. Dina Kruger, Director, 
Climate Change Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, 
Environmental Protection Agency.
    On June 9, 2009, the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment 
held a hearing entitled ``Environmental Research at the 
Department of Energy.'' The hearing examined the Department of 
Energy's stewardship of its seven National Environmental 
Research Parks, as well as other climate and environmental 
research programs conducted by the DOE Office of Science. 
Witnesses included: (1) Dr. Paul Hanson, Ecosystem Science 
Group Leader at Oak Ridge National Laboratory; (2) Dr. David 
Bader, Director of the Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and 
Intercomparison; (3) Dr. Nathan McDowell, lead researcher in 
the Atmospheric, Climate, and Environmental Dynamics Group at 
Los Alamos National Laboratory; and (4) Dr. Whit Gibbons, 
Professor Emeritus of Ecology at the University of Georgia and 
Head of the Environmental Outreach and Education program at the 
Savannah River Ecology Laboratory.
    On July 21, 2009, the Subcommittee on Research and Science 
Education held a hearing entitled ``Encouraging the 
Participation of Female Students in STEM Fields.'' The purpose 
of the hearing was to examine current research findings, best 
practices, and the role of the Federal agencies in increasing 
the interest of girls in STEM in primary and secondary schools, 
and addressing the challenges that deter young women from 
pursuing post-secondary STEM degrees. The witnesses included: 
(1) Dr. Alan I. Leshner, Chief Executive Officer, American 
Association for the Advancement of Science; (2) Dr. Marcia 
Brumit Kropf, Chief Operating Officer, Girls Incorporated; (3) 
Dr. Sandra Hanson, Professor of Sociology, Catholic University; 
(4) Ms. Barbara Bogue, Associate Professor of Engineering 
Science and Mechanics and Women in Engineering, Penn State 
College of Engineering; and (5) Ms. Cherryl Thomas, President, 
Ardmore Associates LLC.
    On July 30, 2009, the Subcommittee on Research and Science 
Education held a hearing entitled ``A Systems Approach to 
Improving K-12 STEM Education.'' The purpose of the hearing was 
to examine how the many public and private stakeholders in an 
urban K-12 system can work together to improve STEM education 
inside and outside of the classroom. The witnesses included: 
(1) Dr. Wanda Ward, Acting Assistant Director, Directorate for 
Education and Human Resources, National Science Foundation; (2) 
Ms. Maggie Daley, Chair, After School Matters; (3) Mr. Michael 
Lach, Officer of Teaching and Learning, Chicago Public Schools; 
(4) Dr. Donald Wink, Director of Undergraduate Studies, 
Department of Chemistry, and Director of Graduate Studies, 
Learning Sciences Research Institute, University of Illinois at 
Chicago; and (5) Ms. Katherine Pickus, Divisional Vice 
President, Global Citizenship and Policy, Abbott.
    On September 10, 2009, the Subcommittee on Energy and 
Environment held a hearing entitled ``Biological Research for 
Energy and Medical Applications at the Department of Energy 
Office of Science.'' The hearing examined biological research 
activities of the DOE Office of Science conducted through the 
Biological and Environmental Research (BER) and Nuclear Physics 
(NP) programs. Witnesses included: (1) Dr. Anna Palmisano, 
Director of BER; (2) Dr. Jay Keasling, CEO of Joint BioEnergy 
Institute at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; (3) Dr. 
Allison Campbell, Director of the WR Wiley Environmental 
Molecular Sciences Laboratory at the Pacific Northwest National 
Laboratory; (4) Dr. Ari Patrinos, President of Synthetic 
Genomics, Inc.; and (5) Dr. Jehanne Gillo, Facilities & Project 
Management Division Director of NP.
    On September 24, 2009, the Subcommittee on Technology and 
Innovation held a hearing entitled ``The Potential Need for 
Measurement Standards to Facilitate the Research and 
Development of Biologic Drugs.'' The purpose of the hearing was 
to examine the need for the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology (NIST) to develop measurement standards and 
protocols to aid research and development of biologic drugs. 
Witnesses included: (1) Dr. Anthony Mire-Sluis, Executive 
Director, Global Product Quality and Quality Compliance, Amgen, 
Inc.; (2) Dr. Patrick Vink, Senior Vice President and Global 
Head of Biologics, Mylan GmbH; (3) Dr. Steven Kozlowski, 
Director, Office of Biotechnology Products, Office of 
Pharmaceutical Science, Center for Drug Evaluation and 
Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA); and (4) Dr. 
Willie May, Director, Chemical Science and Technology 
Laboratory, NIST.
    On October 1, 2009, the Subcommittee on Energy and 
Environment held a hearing entitled ``Investigating the Nature 
of Matter, Energy, Space, and Time.'' The hearing discussed the 
fundamental physics research activities of the DOE Office of 
Science conducted through the High Energy Physics (HEP) and 
Nuclear Physics (NP) programs and examined how these areas of 
study relate to the work of other DOE program offices and 
federal agencies.
    On October 8, 2009, the Subcommittee on Research and 
Science Education held a hearing entitled ``Investing in High-
Risk, High-Reward Research.'' The purpose of the hearing was to 
examine mechanisms for funding high-risk, potentially high-
reward research, and the appropriate role of the Federal 
government in supporting such research. Witnesses included: (1) 
Dr. Neal F. Lane, Malcolm Gillis University Professor and 
Senior Fellow, James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy, 
Rice University; (2) Dr. James P. Collins, Assistant Director 
for Biological Sciences, National Science Foundation; (3) Dr. 
Richard D. McCullough, Professor of Chemistry and Vice 
President of Research, Carnegie Mellon University; and (4) Dr. 
Gerald M. Rubin, Vice President and Director, Janelia Farm 
Research Campus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute.
    On October 22, 2009, the Subcommittee on Research and 
Science Education held a hearing entitled ``Engineering in K-12 
Education.'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine the 
potential benefits of, challenges to, and current models for 
incorporating engineering education at the K-12 level. 
Witnesses included: (1) Dr. Linda Katehi, Chair, National 
Academy of Engineering Committee on K-12 Engineering Education, 
and Chancellor, University of California, Davis; (2) Dr. Thomas 
Peterson, Assistant Director for Engineering, National Science 
Foundation; (3) Dr. Ioannis Miaoulis, President and Director, 
Museum of Science, Boston and Founder, National Center for 
Technological Literacy; (4) Dr. Darryll Pines, Dean and Nariman 
Farvardin Professor of Engineering, A. James Clark School of 
Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park; and (5) Mr. 
Rick Sandlin, Principal, Martha and Josh Morriss Mathematics 
and Engineering Elementary School, Texarkana, Texas.
    On October 29, 2009, the Subcommittee on Energy and 
Environment held a hearing entitled ``The Next Generation of 
Fusion Energy Research.'' The hearing examined research 
activities on fusion energy conducted within the Office of 
Science's Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) program and DOE's 
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), as well as the 
possibilities for international partnerships. Witnesses 
included: (1) Dr. Edmund Synakowski, Director of FES; (2) Dr. 
Stewart Prager, Director of the Princeton Plasma Physics 
Laboratory and former Chair of DOE's Fusion Energy Sciences 
Advisory Committee; (3) Dr. Thom Mason, Director of Oak Ridge 
National Laboratory; and (4) Dr. Riccardo Betti, Assistant 
Director of the University of Rochester's Laboratory for Laser 
Energetics.
    On January 20, 2010, the Committee on Science and 
Technology held a hearing entitled ``America COMPETES: Big 
Picture Perspectives on the Need for Innovation, Investments in 
R & D and a Commitment to STEM Education.'' The purpose of the 
hearing was to examine the role that science and technology 
play in promoting economic security and maintaining U.S. 
competitiveness and to understand the perspective of the 
business community on the reauthorization of the America 
COMPETES Act. Witnesses included: (1) Mr. John Castellani, 
President, Business Roundtable; (2) Mr. Tom Donohue, President, 
U.S. Chamber of Commerce; (3) Governor John Engler, President, 
National Association of Manufacturers; and (4) Ms. Deborah 
Wince-Smith, President and CEO, Council on Competitiveness.
    On January 21, 2010, the Subcommittee on Technology and 
Innovation held a hearing entitled ``Commerce Department 
Programs to Support Job Creation and Innovation at Small and 
Medium-Sized Manufacturers.'' The purpose of the hearing was to 
learn about the challenges faced by small and medium-sized 
manufacturers, as well as entrepreneurs marketing new 
technology, and to learn about Department of Commerce 
initiatives to address these challenges and examine how those 
programs can be made most effective for these enterprises. 
Witnesses included: (1) The Honorable Dennis F. Hightower, 
Deputy Secretary of Commerce, U.S. Department of Commerce 
(DOC); (2) Ms. Jennifer Owens, Vice President, Ann Arbor Spark; 
(3) Ms. RoseAnn B. Rosenthal, President and CEO, Ben Franklin 
Technology Partners of Southeastern Pennsylvania; and (4) Mr. 
Michael Coast, President, Michigan Manufacturing Technology 
Center.
    On January 27, 2010, the Committee on Science and 
Technology held a hearing entitled ``The Advanced Research 
Projects Agency--Energy (ARPA-E): Assessing the Agency's 
Progress and Promise in Transforming the U.S. Energy Innovation 
System.'' The purpose of the hearing was to review progress 
made on establishing ARPA-E and discuss what differentiates 
ARPA-E from other DOE programs, hear accounts of experiences 
with the agency's first funding opportunities, examine the 
agency's plans and goals for the coming years, and discuss ways 
in which ARPA-E may be improved through reauthorization of the 
America COMPETES Act. The witnesses included: (1) Dr. Arun 
Majumdar, Director of ARPA-E; (2) Dr. Charles Vest, President 
of the National Academy of Engineering; (3) Dr. Anthony Atti, 
President and CEO of Phononic Devices, Inc.; and (4) Dr. John 
Pierce, Vice President of Technology at DuPont Applied 
BioSciences.
    On February 4, 2010, the Subcommittee on Research and 
Science Education held a hearing entitled ``Strengthening 
Undergraduate and Graduate STEM Education.'' The purpose of the 
hearing was to examine STEM education in undergraduate and 
graduate institutions, including the role of the NSF in 
strengthening post-secondary STEM education. The witnesses 
included: (1) Dr. Joan Ferrini-Mundy, Acting Assistant Director 
for Education and Human Resources, National Science Foundation; 
(2) Mr. Rick Stephens, Senior Vice President for Resources and 
Administration, Boeing Company; (3) Dr. Noah Finkelstein, 
Associate Professor of Physics, University of Colorado at 
Boulder; (4) Dr. Karen Klomparens, Associate Provost and Dean 
for Graduate Education, Michigan State University; and (5) Dr. 
Robert Mathieu, Professor and Chair of Astronomy, University of 
Wisconsin-Madison.
    On February 23, 2010, the Subcommittee on Research and 
Science Education held a hearing entitled ``The State of 
Research Infrastructure at U.S. Universities.'' The purpose of 
the hearing was to examine the research and research training 
infrastructure of our universities and colleges, including 
research facilities, and cyberinfrastructure capabilities, the 
capacity of the research infrastructure to meet the needs of 
U.S. scientists and engineers now and in the future, and the 
appropriate role of the Federal government in sustaining such 
infrastructure. Witnesses included: (1) Dr. Leslie Tolbert, 
Vice President for Research, Graduate Studies and Economic 
Development, University of Arizona; (2) Mr. Albert Horvath, 
Senior Vice President for Finance and Business, Pennsylvania 
State University; (3) Dr. John R. Raymond, Vice President for 
Academic Affairs and Provost, Medical University of South 
Carolina, and Chair, State of South Carolina EPSCoR Committee; 
and (4) Dr. Thom Dunning, Director of the National Center for 
Supercomputing Applications, University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign.
    On February 24, 2010, the Committee on Science and 
Technology held a hearing entitled ``The Administration's FY 
2011 Research and Development Budget Proposal.'' The purpose of 
the hearing was to receive testimony from Dr. John Holdren, 
Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and 
Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy on the 
Administration's proposed fiscal year 2011 funding for Federal 
research, development, demonstration, and commercial 
application programs and to examine the status of program 
authorized in the America COMPETES Act. Dr. Holdren also 
discussed Energy Innovation Hubs.
    On February 24, 2010, the Subcommittee on Technology and 
Innovation held a hearing entitled ``How Can NIST Better Serve 
the Needs of the Biomedical Research Community in the 21st 
Century?'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine ways in 
which NIST could better serve the needs of the biomedical 
community. The witnesses included: (1) Dr. Thomas M. Baer, 
Executive Director, Stanford Photonics Research Center, Ginzton 
Lab; (2) Sharon F. Terry, MA, President and CEO, Genetic 
Alliance; and (3) Dr. Daniel Sullivan, Professor and Vice 
Chair, Research in Radiology, Duke University Medical Center 
and Science Advisor, Radiologic Society of North America.
    On March 3, 2010, the Committee on Science and Technology 
held a hearing entitled ``The Department of Energy Fiscal Year 
2011 Research and Development Budget Proposal.'' The purpose of 
the hearing was to receive testimony from Secretary of Energy 
Steven Chu on the President's Fiscal Year 2011 budget request 
for energy research and technology development programs at DOE, 
including activities under the Offices of Science, Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Fossil Energy, Nuclear Energy, 
Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, the Advanced 
Research Projects Agency--Energy, and the Loan Guarantee 
Program.
    On March 4, 2010, the Committee on Science and Technology 
held a hearing entitled ``Reform in K-12 STEM Education.'' The 
purpose of the hearing was to examine the role of Federal 
agencies in supporting improvements in K-12 STEM education and 
promoting STEM literacy in preparation for the reauthorization 
of the America COMPETES Act. The witnesses included: (1) Dr. 
Jim Simons, Founder and Chairman, Math for America; (2) Ms. 
Ellen Futter, President, American Museum of Natural History; 
(3) Dr. Gordon Gee, President, The Ohio State University; and 
(4) Dr. Jeffrey Wadsworth, President and CEO, Batelle Memorial 
Institute.
    On March 10, 2010, the Subcommittee on Research and Science 
Education held a hearing entitled ``The National Science 
Foundation's FY 2011 Budget Request.'' The purpose of the 
hearing was to examine the priorities in the National Science 
Foundation's FY 2011 budget request, and to examine core 
activities, initiatives, and policy directions for research, 
infrastructure, education and workforce training at the 
Foundation. The witnesses included Dr. Arden Bement, Director 
of the National Science Foundation, and Dr. Steven Beering, 
Chair of the National Science Board.
    On March 16, 2010, the Subcommittee on Research and Science 
Education held a hearing entitled ``Broadening Participation in 
STEM.'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine institutional 
and cultural barriers to broadening the participation of 
students from underrepresented groups pursuing degrees in STEM, 
efforts to overcome these barriers, and the role that Federal 
agencies can play in supporting these efforts. The witnesses 
included: (1) Dr. Shirley M. Malcom, Head of the Directorate 
for Education and Human Resources Programs, American 
Association for the Advancement of Science; (2) Dr. Alicia C. 
Dowd, Associate Professor of Higher Education, University of 
Southern California; (3) Dr. Keivan Stassun, Associate 
Professor of Physics & Astronomy, Vanderbilt University; (4) 
Dr. David Yarlott, President of Little Big Horn College; and 
(5) Ms. Elaine Craft, Director of the South Carolina Advanced 
Technological Education National Resource Center, Florence-
Darlington Technical College.
    On March 17, 2010, the Committee on Science and Technology 
held a hearing entitled ``The Future of Manufacturing: What is 
the Role of the Federal Government in Supporting Innovation by 
U.S. Manufacturers?'' The hearing examined the need for U.S. 
manufacturers to adopt innovative technologies and processes in 
order to remain globally competitive, and sought to determine 
the appropriate role for the Federal Government in supporting 
efforts by U.S. manufacturers to innovate. Witnesses included: 
(1) Dr. Susan Smyth, Director of Manufacturing, GM R & D, and 
Chief Scientist for Manufacturing, General Motors Company; (2) 
Dr. Len Sauers, Vice President, Global Sustainability, Procter 
& Gamble; (3) Mr. Debtosh Chakrabarti, President and Chief 
Operating Officer, PMC Group Inc., (4) Dr. Mark Tuominen, 
Director, National Nanomanufacturing Network; and (5) Mr. Wayne 
Crews, Vice President for Policy and Director of Technology 
Studies, Competitive Enterprise Institute.
    On March 23, 2010, the Subcommittee on Technology and 
Innovation held a hearing entitled ``NIST Structure and 
Authorities, Its Role in Standards, and Federal Agency 
Coordination on Technical Standards.'' The purpose of the 
hearing was to review the proposed re-alignment of operational 
units at NIST, examine the current role that NIST plays in 
technical standards, and examine the need for federal agencies' 
and departments' coordination on technical standards. The 
witnesses included: (1) The Honorable Patrick Gallagher, 
Director, NIST; (2) Dr. James Serum, President, Scitek Ventures 
LLC, and past Chairman, NIST Visiting Committee on Advanced 
Technology (VCAT); (3) Mr. Craig Shank, General Manager, 
Interoperability at Microsoft; (4) Mr. Andrew Updegrove, 
Partner, Gesmer Updegrove LLC; and (5) Mr. Philip Wennblom, 
Director of Standards, Intel Corporation.

                          V. Committee Actions


                 SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT

    On March 25, 2010, the Subcommittee on Energy and 
Environment met to consider a Committee Print. The Committee 
Print was comprised of H.R. 4905, the Department of Energy 
Office of Science Authorization Act of 2010 (introduced by 
Representative Brian Baird on March 22, 2010), H.R. 4906, the 
ARPA-E Reauthorization Act of 2010 (introduced by Chairman Bart 
Gordon on March 22, 2010), and H.R. 4907, the Energy Innovation 
Hubs Authorization Act of 2010 (introduced by Representative 
Russ Carnahan on March 22, 2010). The Subcommittee considered 
the following amendments:
    1. Mr. Baird offered a manager's amendment to make several 
technical and clarifying changes to the print. The amendment 
was agreed to by voice vote.
    2. Mr. Ehlers offered an amendment to strike a section and 
replace it with a new section detailing the mission and duties 
of the Office of Science. The amendment was agreed to by voice 
vote.
    3. Mr. Ehlers offered an amendment to the authorization of 
Energy Frontier Research Centers to state that they will 
``conduct fundamental and use-inspired energy research to 
accelerate scientific breakthroughs related to needs 
identified'' in certain reports. The amendment was agreed to by 
voice vote.
    4. Mr. Lipinski offered an amendment directing the Office 
of Science to conduct outreach to increase the use of high-
performance computer modeling and simulation capabilities by 
industry, including manufacturers. The amendment was agreed to 
by voice vote.
    5. Mr. Garamendi offered an amendment to require that, 
after the release of a National Academies report on fusion 
energy research, the Secretary submit a plan to Congress 
describing the Department's plan to incorporate any relevant 
recommendations from that report. The amendment was agreed to 
by voice vote.
    6. Mr. Lipinski offered an amendment providing additional 
direction to the Office of Science Laboratories Infrastructure 
program's annual reporting requirements. The amendment was 
agreed to by voice vote.
    7. Mr. Ehlers offered an amendment to strike the 
authorization levels specified for Basic Energy Sciences 
activities, Biological and Environmental Research activities, 
and Advanced Scientific Computing Research activities. The 
amendment was defeated by recorded vote (6-12).
    8. Mrs. Biggert offered an amendment to lower the Office of 
Science authorization levels for each of the fiscal years 2011 
through 2015. The amendment was withdrawn.
    9. Mr. Diaz-Balart offered an amendment to all Titles of 
the Committee Print by striking the authorization of 
appropriations for fiscal years 2014 and 2015. The amendment 
was defeated by voice vote.
    10. Mr. Bartlett offered an amendment requiring the ARPA-E 
Director to ensure that ``at least 30 percent of applicants who 
are selected are a small business or partner with a small 
business.'' The amendment was withdrawn.
    11. Mr. Lujan offered an amendment to increase the amount 
of appropriated funds that shall be used for technology 
transfer and outreach activities from 2.5 percent to 5 percent. 
The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    12. Mr. Inglis offered an amendment limiting the amount 
that may be appropriated to ARPA-E for any fiscal year to 
$300,000,000 unless the amount appropriated for that year to 
the Office of Science exceeds the amount appropriated for the 
previous fiscal year, adjusted for inflation. The amendment was 
defeated by voice vote.
    13. Ms. Johnson offered an amendment to require that for at 
least 3 awards to consortia for Energy Innovation Hubs, the 
Secretary shall give special considerations to applications in 
which 1 or more of the institutions are 1890 Land Grant 
Institutions, Predominantly Black Institutions, Tribal Colleges 
or Universities, or Hispanic Serving Institutions. The 
amendment was withdrawn.
    Mr. Baird moved that the Subcommittee favorably report the 
Committee Print, as amended, to the Full Committee. The motion 
was agreed to by voice vote.

             SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND SCIENCE EDUCATION

    On April 14, 2010, the Subcommittee on Research and Science 
Education met to consider a Committee Print. The Committee 
Print was based on the text of H.R. 4997, the National Science 
Foundation Authorization Act of 2010, which was introduced by 
Representative Daniel Lipinski on April 13, 2010. The 
Subcommittee considered the following amendments:
    1. Mr. Lipinski offered a manager's amendment to make 
several technical and clarifying changes to the bill, and to 
add four new sections to the bill to: establish the National 
Center for Science and Engineering Statistics at the 
Foundation; authorize a program of grants to support 
partnerships between institutions of higher education and 
private sector entities that promote innovation and increase 
the economic and social impact of research; and authorize the 
Director to award grants to support reform of undergraduate and 
graduate STEM education at institutions of higher education. 
The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    2. Mr. Lipinski offered an amendment to add a new section 
to Title II of the bill authorizing a pilot program to award 
innovation inducement cash prizes in any area of research 
supported by the Foundation. The amendment was agreed to by 
voice vote.
    3. Mr. Neugebauer offered an amendment to section 102 of 
the bill to strike all authorizations of appropriations for the 
Foundation for fiscal years 2014 and 2015. The amendment was 
defeated by recorded vote (4-7).
    4. Mr. Neugebauer offered an amendment to section 203 of 
the bill to strike the list of manufacturing research areas 
allowed under this section. The amendment was defeated by voice 
vote.
    5. Mr. Neugebauer offered an amendment to section 303 of 
the bill to strike the subsection that reduces the 
institutional matching requirement for the Robert Noyce Teacher 
Scholarship Program from 50 percent to 30 percent. The 
amendment was defeated by voice vote.
    6. Ms. Johnson offered an amendment to add a new section to 
Title III of the bill requiring NSF to continue supporting the 
Historically Black Colleges and Universities-Undergraduate 
Program, the Tribal Colleges and Universities Program, and the 
Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation program, as 
separate programs through September 30, 2011 and to develop and 
submit a plan to Congress for approval prior to any 
consolidation or realignment of those programs. The amendment 
was agreed to by voice vote.
    7. Ms. Fudge offered an amendment to add a new section to 
Title III of the bill requiring the Director of NSF and the 
Secretary of Education to collaborate in identifying, 
prioritizing, and developing strategies to address grand 
challenges in pre-K-12 STEM research and development. The 
amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    8. Mr. Tonko offered an amendment to add a new section to 
Title III of the bill requiring the Director to award grants to 
institutions of higher education, nonprofit organizations, or 
consortia thereof, to provide research experiences for 10 or 
more undergraduate STEM students. The amendment was agreed to 
by voice vote.
    Mr. Lipinski moved that the Subcommittee favorably report 
the Committee print, as amended, to the full Committee. The 
motion was agreed to by voice vote.

               SUBCOMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION

    On April 21, 2010, the Subcommittee on Technology and 
Innovation met to consider a Committee Print. The Committee 
Print was based on the text of H.R. 5794, the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology Authorization Act of 
2010, introduced by Representative David Wu on April 20, 2010. 
The Subcommittee considered the following amendments:
    1. Mr. Wu offered a manager's amendment which removed the 
duties of the Under Secretary for Standards and Technology as 
outlined in the Committee Print. The amendment also made the 
adjustment in the federal share of the MEP Centers to be a 
temporary adjustment for fiscal years 2011 through 2015 and 
requires a report from the Secretary on the cost-share 
structure after FY 2015. The amendment was agreed to by voice 
vote.
    2. Ms. Edwards amended the Committee Print by requiring the 
Director to give extra consideration to underrepresented 
minorities when evaluating applications for graduate, 
undergraduate, and postdoctoral fellowships. Her amendment also 
required the Director to give priority to applications from 
teachers from high-need schools for the NIST teacher science 
and technology enhancement program. The amendment was agreed to 
by voice vote.
    3. Mr. Broun offered an amendment to reduce the number of 
authorization years for NIST from five to three years. The 
amendment was defeated by recorded vote (5-7).
    4. Mr. Smith offered an amendment to clarify that the use 
of cybersecurity standards and guidelines developed by NIST for 
industry and public would not be mandatory. The amendment was 
agreed to by voice vote.
    5. Mr. Lujan offered an amendment that would require the 
Director to give special consideration to 1890 Institutions, 
Predominantly Black Institutions, Tribal Colleges and 
Universities, and Hispanic-serving institutions, when 
establishing university research centers under the bioscience 
section of the Committee Print. The amendment was agreed to by 
voice vote.
    Mr. Wu moved that the Subcommittee favorably report the 
Committee Print, as amended, to the Full Committee. The motion 
was agreed to by voice vote.

                             FULL COMMITTEE

    On April 22, 2010, Chairman Bart Gordon introduced H.R. 
5116, the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010. The 
bill was based in part on the Committee Prints reported to the 
Full Committee by the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, 
the Subcommittee on Research and Science Education, and the 
Subcommittee on Technology and Innovation.
    On April 28, 2010, the Committee on Science and Technology 
met to consider H.R. 5116, the America COMPETES Reauthorization 
Act of 2010. The Committee agreed by unanimous consent to 
consider an Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute offered by 
Chairman Bart Gordon as original text for purposes of 
amendment. The Committee considered the following amendments:
    1. Chairman Gordon offered a manager's amendment that made 
several technical and clarifying changes and amended the 
authorizations of appropriations in Sections 212, 402, and 611. 
The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    2. Mr. Broun offered an amendment to the manager's 
amendment to modify the authorizations of appropriations. The 
amendment was defeated by recorded vote (11-24).
    3. Mr. Diaz-Balart offered an amendment to the manager's 
amendment to modify the authorizations of appropriations. The 
amendment was defeated by recorded vote (11-25).
    4. Mr. Diaz-Balart offered an amendment to the manager's 
amendment to strike all authorizations of appropriations after 
Fiscal Year 2013 for NSF, NIST, Office of Science, and ARPA-E. 
The amendment was defeated by voice vote.
    5. Mr. Rohrabacher offered an amendment to the manager's 
amendment to strike the authorizations of appropriations for 
the Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy after Fiscal Year 
2013. The amendment was defeated by voice vote.
    6. Mr. Rohrabacher offered an amendment to the manager's 
amendment to strike the authorization of appropriations for the 
Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy after Fiscal Year 
2015. The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    7. Ms. Biggert offered an amendment to the manager's 
amendment to modify the authorization of appropriations for the 
Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy. The amendment was 
defeated by voice vote.
    8. Ms. Johnson offered an amendment to insert a new section 
entitled ``Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Academic 
Science and Engineering'' and a new section entitled 
``Collection of Data on Demographics of Faculty.'' The 
amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    9. Ms. Dahlkemper offered an amendment to Section 223 
(``National Science Foundation Manufacturing Research'') to 
require the National Science Foundation to award grants to 
strengthen technical education and training in advanced 
manufacturing, including through the Foundation's Advanced 
Technological Education program. The amendment was agreed to by 
voice vote.
    10. Mr. Inglis offered an amendment to Section 228 (``Prize 
Awards'') to prohibit the use of Federal funds to engage in the 
research for which the prize is being awarded. The amendment 
was agreed to by voice vote.
    11. Ranking Member Hall offered an amendment to insert a 
new section to repeal the Academic Research Facilities 
Modernization program at the National Science Foundation. The 
amendment was defeated by voice vote.
    12. Mr. Neugebauer offered an amendment to Section 243 
(``Robert Noyce teacher scholarships program'') to strike 
amendments to Section 10A of the National Science Foundation 
Authorization Act of 2002. The amendment was withdrawn.
    13. Mr. Neugebauer offered an amendment to Section 243 
(``Robert Noyce teacher scholarships program'') to prohibit the 
use of funds by an institution of higher education to engage in 
capacity building activities. The amendment was withdrawn.
    14. Mr. Neugebauer offered an amendment to Section 243 
(``Robert Noyce teacher Scholarships Program'') to require that 
the matching requirement be provided in cash. The amendment was 
agreed to by voice vote.
    15. Mr. Ehlers offered an amendment to Section 248 
(``Transforming Undergraduate Education in STEM'') to add a 
provision stating that uses of funds under the section may 
include support for initiatives that advance integration of 
global challenges such as sustainability into disciplinary and 
interdisciplinary STEM education. The amendment was agreed to 
by voice vote.
    16. Mr. Wilson offered an amendment to Section 251 (``Grand 
Challenges in Education Research'') to specify that students in 
rural schools should be included in the diverse learning 
populations to be considered in developing research grand 
challenges. The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    17. Mr. Bartlett offered an amendment to Section 253 
(``Laboratory Science Pilot Program'') to repeal subparagraphs 
(B), (C), (D), (E), and (F) of Section 8(8) of the National 
Science Foundation Act of 2002. The amendment was withdrawn.
    18. Mr. Wu offered an amendment to insert a new section 
authorizing the National Science Foundation to award grants for 
the purpose of providing integrated internship experiences for 
undergraduate students that connect private sector internship 
experiences with the students' STEM coursework. The amendment 
was agreed to by voice vote.
    19. Mr. Bartlett offered an amendment to Mr. Wu's amendment 
to require a 50 percent non-Federal cost share from 
partnerships established or expanded and to restrict the use of 
Federal funds provided under certain circumstances. The 
amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    20. Mr. Lujan offered an amendment to insert a new section 
to require the Director of the National Science Foundation to 
continue to support the Tribal Colleges and Universities 
program, to specify certain activities that grants awarded 
under the program shall support, and to permit funding to be 
used for instrumentation. The amendment was agreed to by voice 
vote.
    21. Mr. Diaz-Balart offered an amendment to strike all 
authorizations of appropriations for fiscal years after fiscal 
year 2013 for the following sections: 303(c) (``Energy Applied 
Science Talent Expansion Program for Institutions of Higher 
Education''); Section 502 (``Federal Loan Guarantees for 
Innovative Technologies in Manufacturing''); Section 503 
(``Regional Innovation Program''); and Section 632 (``Energy 
Innovation Hubs''). The amendment was withdrawn.
    22. Mr. McCaul offered an amendment to insert a new section 
authorizing the Secretary of Energy to provide funds to the 
National Science Foundation for the Integrative Graduate 
Education and Research Traineeship program and to contribute 
funds to curriculum development activities at the National 
Science Foundation for the purpose of improving undergraduate 
and graduate interdisciplinary engineering and architecture 
education related to design and construction of high 
performance buildings. The amendment was agreed to by voice 
vote.
    23. Ranking Member Hall offered an amendment to Section 404 
(``Reorganization of NIST Laboratories'') to modify the mission 
of the Engineering Laboratory. The amendment was agreed to by 
voice vote.
    24. Mr. Broun offered an amendment to strike Title V 
(``Innovation''). The amendment was defeated by recorded vote 
(8-25).
    25. Mr. Ehlers offered an amendment to Section 502 
(``Federal Loan Guarantees for Innovative Technologies in 
Manufacturing'') by adding to the list of items that the 
Secretary of Commerce must address in final regulations for the 
program criteria that the Secretary shall use to determine 
whether a borrower demonstrates that a market exists for the 
innovative technology product, or the integral component of 
such product, to be manufactured. The amendment was agreed to 
by voice vote.
    26. Mr. Bartlett offered an amendment to Section 502 
(``Federal Loan Guarantees for Innovative Technologies in 
Manufacturing'') to require that the Secretary of Commerce 
promulgate regulations and policies to carry out the 
manufacturing loan guarantee program in accordance with OMB 
Circular A-129. The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    27. Mr. Bilbray offered an amendment to Section 502 
(``Federal Loan Guarantees for Innovative Technologies in 
Manufacturing'') to state that it is the Sense of Congress that 
no loan guarantee shall be made under the program unless the 
borrower agrees to use a federally-approved electronic 
employment verification system to verify employment 
eligibility. The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    28. Mr. Lipinski offered an amendment to Section 603 
(``Mission of the Office of Science'') to require the Director 
to develop a plan to increase the percentage of domestically 
sourced hardware for projects of Office of Science. The 
amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    29. Ms. Biggert offered an amendment to Section 603 
(``Mission of the Office of Science'') to require that, as part 
of the President's annual budget request, the Secretary include 
a detailed summary of the degree to which current research 
activities are competitive and merit-reviewed. The amendment 
was agreed to by voice vote.
    30. Mr. Inglis offered an amendment to Section 605 
(``Biological and Environmental Research Program'') to include 
hydrogen among the targeted research, development, and 
demonstration biological systems science activities. The 
amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    31. Mr. Smith offered an amendment to Section 605 
(``Biological and Environmental Research Program'') to include 
requirements for a research plan for Biological System Science 
activities. The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    32. Mr. Olson offered an amendment to strike Subsection 
605(c) (``Climate and Environmental Sciences Activities''). The 
amendment was defeated by voice vote.
    33. Mr. Neugebauer offered an amendment to Section 622 
(``ARPA-E Amendments'') to require the Director to ensure that 
projects with a high potential to result in technology advances 
that enable reductions in imports of energy from foreign 
sources receive the highest priority consideration. The 
amendment was defeated by voice vote.
    34. Mr. Smith offered an amendment to Section 622 (``ARPA-E 
Amendments'') to require applicants to disclose prior efforts 
and investments in proposed projects and to justify funding 
projects with prior industry support. The amendment was agreed 
to by voice vote.
    35. Mr. Olson offered an amendment to Section 622(4), in 
the proposed subsection (f), by striking ``shall'' and 
inserting ``may'', and to Section 622(5) by striking 
subparagraph (F) thereby restoring certain existing statutory 
limitations on staffing at ARPA-E. The amendment was withdrawn.
    36. Ms. Biggert offered an amendment to Section 632 
(``Energy Innovation Hubs'') by striking the paragraph entitled 
``TestBed and Renovation Exception''. The amendment was 
withdrawn.
    37. Ms. Johnson offered an amendment to Section 632 
(``Energy Innovation Hubs'') to direct the Secretary to give 
priority consideration to applications in which 1 or more of 
the institutions under subsection (b)(1)(A) are 1890 Land Grant 
Institutions, Predominately Black Institutions, Tribal Colleges 
or Universities, or Hispanic Serving Institutions. The 
amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    38. Ranking Member Hall offered an amendment to Section 632 
(``Energy Innovation Hubs'') to expand the definition of 
``advanced energy technologies'' to include technologies to 
enable expanded supply and production of conventional domestic 
sources of energy such as coal, oil and natural gas. The 
amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    39. Mr. Peters offered an amendment to Section 632 
(``Energy Innovation Hubs'') by adding to the list of 
definitions of Advanced Energy Technologies innovative 
technology ``that enables advanced vehicles, vehicle 
components, and related technologies that result in significant 
energy savings''. The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    40. Ms. Biggert offered an amendment to Section 632 
(``Energy Innovation Hubs'') to insert ``including the 
Department of Energy Federally Funded Research and Development 
Centers'' after ``Federal entity.'' The amendment was agreed to 
by voice vote.
    41. Mr. Lujan offered an amendment to Title VI 
(``Department of Energy'') to add a new subtitle entitled 
``Cooperative Research and Development Fund'' and require the 
Secretary to make funds available to the Department of Energy 
National Laboratories for the Federal share of cooperative 
research and development agreements. The amendment was agreed 
to by voice vote.
    42. Ms. Biggert offered an amendment to Mr. Lujan's 
amendment to insert the requirement that no funds allocated for 
this section shall come from funds allocated for the Office of 
Science. The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    43. Mr. Bartlett offered an amendment to add a new title to 
the bill expressing a Sense of Congress that programs that 
correspond to the recommendations of the National Academy of 
Sciences' 2005 report entitled ``Rising Above the Gathering 
Storm'' remain critical to maintaining long-term United States 
economic competitiveness and shall receive priority funding. 
The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    44. Mr. Broun offered an amendment to add a new title which 
states that none of the funds authorized to be appropriated may 
be used to lobby any person or entity. The amendment was 
withdrawn.
    45. Ranking Member Hall offered an amendment to add a new 
title to the bill to state that institutions of higher 
education chartered to serve large numbers of students with 
disabilities and those with programs serving or those serving 
disabled veterans shall receive special consideration and have 
a designation consistent with the designation for other 
institutions that serve populations underrepresented in STEM. 
The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    46. Ranking Member Hall offered an amendment to add a new 
title to the bill to state that, in awarding scholarships and 
fellowships under the bill, an institution of higher education 
shall give preference to applications from veterans and service 
members. The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    47. Mr. Neugebauer offered an amendment to add a new title 
to the bill to state that no funds authorized to be 
appropriated in Section 212, Section 303, Section 402, Section 
502, Section 503, Section 611, Section 622, and Section 632 are 
authorized to be appropriated that exceed authorizations for 
such prupsoes for Fiscal Year 2010 before the end of the first 
fiscal year for which the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office certifies to the Congress in writing that the Federal 
Government does not have a budget deficit. The amendment was 
defeated by recorded vote (8-23).
    48. Mr. Neugebauer offered an amendment to add a new title 
to change the effective date of the Act to the first January 1 
occuring after the date of enactment and after the conclusion 
of a fiscal year in which the Federal Government did not have a 
budget deficit. The amendment was withdrawn.
    49. Mr. Rohrabacher offered an amendment to add a new title 
to the bill which prohibits the use of funds authorized in the 
bill for projects unless all persons receiving funds are United 
States citizens and all entities receiving funds are 
headquartered in the United States. The amendment was defeated 
by voice vote.
    50. Mr. Rohrabacher offered an amendment to add a new title 
to the bill which prohibits the use of funds authorized in the 
bill for research and development unless all entities involved 
in such research and development agree not to use any developed 
and related technologies for manufacturing outside of the 
United States. The amendment was defeated by voice vote.
    51. Mr. Rohrabacher offered an amendment to add a new title 
to the bill which prohibits funding to any person or entity 
found guilty of infringing on the patent rights of any other 
person or entity. The amendment was withdrawn.
    52. Mr. Rohrabacher offered an amendment to add a new title 
to the bill which states that intellectual property rights from 
technologies developed using funds authorized in the bill shall 
be apportioned to the granting agency in direct proportion to 
the funds granted to the total project cost. The amendment was 
defeated by recorded vote (12-22).
    53. Mr. Broun offered an amendment to strike Section 228 
(``Prize Awards''), Section 407 (``Bioscience Research 
Program''), Section 502 (``Federal Loan Guarantees for 
Innovative Technologies in Manufacturing''), Section 503 
(``Regional Innovation Program''), Subtitle C of Title VI 
(``Energy Innovation Hubs''), and Subsections (b) (``Innovative 
Services Initiative'') and (c) (``Reports'') in Section 406 
(``Manufacturing Extension Partnership''). The amendment was 
defeated by recorded vote ( 9-25).
    54. Mr. Bilbray and Mr. Garamendi offered an amendment to 
Section 607 (``Fusion Energy Research Program'') to require 
that the Director carry out activities to develop technologies 
necessary to enable reliable, sustainable, safe, and 
economically competitive operation of a commercial fusion power 
plant. The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    55. Mr. Bartlett offered an amendment to Subsection 622(k) 
(``Events'') to direct that funding for activities described in 
paragraph (1) shall be provided as part of the technology 
transfer and outreach activities authorized under subsection 
(o)(4)(B). The amendment was agreed to by voice vote.
    Chairman Gordon moved that the Committee favorably report 
the H.R. 5116, as amended, to the House. The motion was agreed 
to by recorded vote (29-8).

              VI. Summary of Major Provisions of the Bill

    Title I makes amendments to the National Nanotechnology 
program and the National Information Technology Research and 
Development program and requires the Director of the Office of 
Science and Technology to develop a policy and clearinghouse 
for federal scientific collections. It also establishes an 
interagency committee under the National Science and Technology 
Council to coordinate manufacturing-related research and 
development and establishes an interagency working group 
focused on access to and stewardship of the results of 
federally funded research. In addition, it authorizes a program 
of workshops, the collection of data, and the development of 
uniform policies related to gender bias in academic science and 
engineering.
    Title II authorizes funding for the National Science 
Foundation, makes administrative amendments relating to the 
National Science Board, includes provisions relating to the 
Foundation's broader impacts review criterion, establishes the 
National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, and 
requires the Director to report data on the demographics of 
STEM faculty at institutions of higher education. Title II also 
requires support for high-risk, high-reward research and 
authorizes programs for interdisciplinary research 
collaborations, manufacturing research and education, 
partnerships between institutions of higher education and 
private sector entities, and innovation inducement cash prizes. 
Title II includes provisions to strengthen institutional 
research partnerships and requires a report on mid-scale 
research instrumentation. In addition, Title II includes 
restrictions on funding for the Integrative Graduate Education 
and Research Traineeship Program, establishes postdoctoral 
fellowship programs (including one in STEM education), makes 
changes to the match requirement under the Robert Noyce Teacher 
Scholarship program, includes provisions relating to 
institutions of higher education chartered to serve students 
with disabilities, authorizes grants for institutional 
integration, requires education and training on effective tools 
to increase participation in STEM by underrepresented groups, 
establishes grant programs to reform undergraduate and graduate 
STEM education, and prohibits consolidation of the Historically 
Black Colleges and Universities Undergraduate Program, the 
Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation program, and 
the Tribal Colleges and Universities Program. Title II requires 
the development of strategies to address grand challenges in 
research and development for K-12 STEM education, provides for 
grants for research experiences for undergraduate students, 
extends the laboratory science pilot program, authorizes grants 
for private sector internship experiences for undergraduate 
students, and authorizes grants to tribal colleges and 
universities to enhance STEM education.
    Title III establishes an interagency committee to 
coordinate Federal STEM education programs, creates an advisory 
committee on STEM education, clarifies the role of the 
Department of Energy relating to STEM education, and authorizes 
the Secretary of Energy to contribute funds to National Science 
Foundation programs for activities related to the design and 
construction of high performance buildings.
    Title IV authorizes funding for the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology (NIST), creates a new position of 
Under Secretary of Standards and Technology at the Department 
of Commerce, reorganizes the operational units at NIST, and 
assigns the Director of NIST responsibilities relating to the 
development of international technical standards. Title IV 
requires MEP centers to work with local community colleges, 
creates an innovative services initiative, requires a review of 
the MEP program using the Malcolm Baldrige criteria, and 
reduces the required MEP cost share. Title IV establishes a 
bioscience research program and increases the number of members 
on the Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology. Finally, 
Title IV requires the Director to establish an emergency 
communication and tracking technologies research initiative, 
requires the Director to give consideration to the goal of 
broadening participation by underrepresented minorities with 
respect to existing fellowship programs and to give special 
consideration to teachers from high-needs schools with respect 
to the teacher science and technology enhancement program, and 
provides clarification on the use of cybersecurity standards 
and guidelines.
    Title V establishes an Office of Innovation and 
Entrepreneurship at the Department of Commerce and creates an 
Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Title V 
also requires the Secretary of Commerce to establish a federal 
loan guarantee program for innovative technologies in 
manufacturing. Finally, Title V requires the Secretary of 
Commerce to establish a regional innovation program.
    Title VI directs the Secretary of Energy to carry out 
research activities in science, including through programs in 
basic energy sciences, biological and environmental research, 
advanced scientific computing research, fusion energy sciences, 
high energy physics, and nuclear physics. Title VI authorizes 
funding for the activities of the Office of Science. Title VI 
also authorizes funding for the Advanced Research Projects 
Agency--Energy and makes changes to the program. Finally, Title 
VI establishes a program to create Energy Innovation Hubs at 
the Department of Energy and directs the Secretary of Energy to 
make funds available to National Laboratories to pay the 
federal share of cooperative research and development 
agreements.
    Title VII includes a Sense of Congress relating to the 
recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences, requires 
special consideration for institutions of higher education 
chartered to serve large numbers of students with disabilities 
and those serving disabled veterans, and requires preference to 
applications from veterans and service members for scholarships 
and fellowships.

                    VII. Section-by-Section Analysis


Sec. 1. Short title.--``America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010''

                 TITLE I--SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY


       Subtitle A--National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments

    Sec. 101. Short title.--``National Nanotechnology 
Initiative Amendments Act of 2010.''
    Sec. 102. National Nanotechnology Program Amendments.--
Modifies the NNI strategic plan to include the specification 
of: (1) near and long term objectives, (2) the timeframe for 
achieving near term objectives, (3) the metrics for measuring 
progress toward objectives, and (4) multi-agency funded 
projects in areas of significant economic and societal impacts 
authorized under section 105. Requires the National 
Nanotechnology Coordination Office (NNCO) to (1) develop a 
public database for projects funded under the Environmental, 
Health and Safety (EHS), Education and Societal Dimensions, and 
Nanomanufacturing program component areas; (2) develop, 
maintain and publicize information about NNI supported 
nanotechnology facilities available for use by academia and 
industry; (3) to report annually on its current and future 
budget requirements. Revises the charge to the National Academy 
of Sciences' National Research Council for the content and 
scope of the triennial reviews of the NNI Program.
    Sec. 103. Societal dimensions of nanotechnology.--Requires 
an OSTP associate director to fulfill the role of coordinator 
for the societal dimensions component of NNI, and assigns 
specific responsibilities and duties to such coordinator. 
Requires the Program to support formal and informal 
nanotechnology science education, including support for course 
development, and faculty professional development. Requires 
formation of an Education Working Group to coordinate, 
prioritize, and plan the educational activities funded under 
the NNI.
    Sec. 104. Technology transfer.--Requires agencies 
supporting nanotechnology research facilities under the NNI to 
allow, and encourage, use of these facilities to assist 
companies in developing prototype products, devices, or 
processes for determining proof of concept. Requires agencies 
to encourage applications for support of nanotechnology 
projects under the SBIR, STTR, and TIP programs. Encourages the 
creation of industry liaison groups in all relevant industry 
sectors to foster technology transfer and to help guide the NNI 
research agenda.
    Sec. 105. Research in areas of national importance.--
Requires the NNI to include support for large-scale 
nanotechnology research and development activities in 
application areas with potential for significant contributions 
to national economic competitiveness or other important 
societal benefits.
    Sec. 106. Nanomanufacturing research.--Specifies specific 
areas of research and development under the Nanomanufacturing 
program component area. Requires the NNI Advisory Panel to 
review the adequacy of the funding level for the 
Nanomanufacturing program component area and its relevance to 
industry needs.
    Sec. 107. Definitions.--Defines terms used in the subtitle.

    Subtitle B--Networking and Information Technology Research and 
                              Development

    Sec. 111. Short Title.--``Networking and Information 
Technology Research and Development Act of 2010''.
    Sec. 112. Program planning and coordination.--Requires the 
NITRD agencies to periodically assess the program contents and 
funding levels and to update the program accordingly. Requires 
the NITRD agencies to develop and periodically update (at 3-
year intervals) a strategic plan for the program and requires 
an annual update on how the program activities planned and 
underway relate to the objectives specified in the strategic 
plan.
    Sec. 113. Large-scale research in areas of national 
importance.--Authorizes the NITRD agencies to support large-
scale, long-term, interdisciplinary research with the potential 
to make significant contributions to society and U.S. economic 
competitiveness and to encourage collaboration between at least 
two agencies as well as cost-sharing from non-Federal sources.
    Sec. 114. Cyber-physical systems and information 
management.--Requires the program to support research and 
development in cyber-physical systems; human-computer 
interactions, visualization, and information management. 
Requires the NCO Director to convene a university/industry task 
force to explore mechanisms for carrying out collaborative 
research and development activities for cyber-physical systems.
    Sec. 115. National coordination office.--Formally 
establishes the NCO; delineates the office's responsibilities; 
mandates annual operating budgets; specifies the source of 
funding for the office (consistent with current practice); and 
stresses the role of the NCO in developing the strategic plan 
and in public outreach and communication with outside 
communities of interest.
    Sec. 116. Improving networking and information technology 
education.--Requires NSF use their programs to improve the 
teaching and learning of networking and information technology 
and encourage the participation of women and underrepresented 
minorities.
    Sec. 117. Conforming and technical amendments.--Makes 
conforming and technical changes to the High-Performance 
Computing Act of 1991.

                   Subtitle C--Other OSTP Provisions

    Sec. 121. Federal scientific collections.--Requires the 
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), in consultation 
with relevant Federal agencies, to develop formal policies for 
the management and use of Federal scientific collections, 
including policies for the disposal of collections, and to 
create an online clearinghouse for information on the contents 
of and access to Federal scientific collections.
    Sec. 122. Coordination of manufacturing research and 
development.--Establishes an interagency committee under the 
National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) with 
responsibilities to plan and coordinate Federal programs and 
activities in manufacturing research and development and to 
develop a strategic plan.
    Sec. 123. Interagency Public Access Committee.--Requires 
OSTP to establish a working group under the NSTC to coordinate 
Federal science agency policies related to the dissemination 
and long-term stewardship of the results of unclassified 
federally funded research. Requires OSTP to solicit input and 
recommendations from and to collaborate with non-Federal 
stakeholders in the development of any policies related to 
public access and requires OSTP to submit a report to Congress 
within 1 year describing the status of any such policies and 
how stakeholder input was incorporated.
    Sec. 124. Fulfilling the potential of women in academic 
science and engineering.--Authorizes a program of workshops to 
minimize gender bias in academic science and engineering for 
Federal science agencies; requires Federal science agencies to 
collect and report composite data, including demographic data, 
on Federal research and development grants; and requires OSTP 
to develop uniform Federal policies to ensure that Federally 
funded researchers with caregiving responsibilities can 
maintain their research programs while attending to those 
responsibilities.

                 TITLE II--NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

    Sec. 201. Short title.--``The National Science Foundation 
Authorization Act of 2010''.

                     Subtitle A--General Provisions

    Sec. 211. Definitions.--Provides definitions for terms used 
in this title.
    Sec. 212. Authorization of appropriations.--Authorizes $44 
billion for the National Science Foundation (NSF) for fiscal 
years 2011-2015, including $35.2 billion for research and 
related activities (R&RA), $5.5 billion for education and human 
resources (EHR), and $1.2 billion for major research equipment 
and facilities construction (MREFC).
    Sec. 213. National science board administrative 
amendments.--Eliminates the cap on the number of professional 
staff for the National Science Board (``the Board''). Changes 
the date on which the Board's biennial Science and Engineering 
Indicators is due to the President and Congress. Modifies the 
scope of reports the Board may submit to the President and 
Congress. Modifies audit requirement for Board adherence to the 
Sunshine Act.
    Sec. 214. Broader impacts review criterion.--Clarifies the 
intent of the Foundation's Broader Impacts Review Criterion. 
Requires the Director to develop and implement a Foundation-
wide policy that: includes a plan to educate Foundation staff, 
merit review panels, and grant applicants on the goals of the 
broader impacts review criterion; encourages colleges, 
universities and other organizations such as science museums to 
help NSF-funded investigators achieve the goals of the broader 
impacts review criterion through existing evidence-based 
programs and activities; and requires grant applicants to 
provide evidence of such institutional support for the portion 
of their proposal intended to satisfy the broader impact review 
criterion.
    Sec. 215. National Center for Science and Engineering 
Statistics.--Establishes the Foundation's Division of Science 
Resource Statistics as the National Center for Science and 
Engineering Statistics and codifies its function as the central 
federal clearinghouse for objective data on the scientific and 
engineering enterprise and the state of STEM education.
    Sec. 216. Collection of data on demographics of faculty.--
Requires the Director to report statistical summary data on the 
demographics of STEM faculty at institutions of higher 
education in the United States.

                  Subtitle B--Research and Innovation

    Sec. 221. Support for potentially transformative 
research.--Requires the Director to apply at least 5 percent of 
the agency's research toward high-risk, high-reward basic 
research. Provide a definition for ``high-risk, high-reward'' 
and examples for how the Director may meet the 5 percent 
requirement.
    Sec. 222. Facilitating interdisciplinary collaborations for 
national needs.--Requires the Director to provide awards for 
interdisciplinary research collaborations that are designed to 
address critical challenges to national security, 
competitiveness, and societal well-being.
    Sec. 223. National Science foundation manufacturing 
research and education.--Requires the Director to carry out a 
program to award competitive grants for manufacturing research 
and requires the Director to award grants to strengthen 
advanced manufacturing education and training.
    Sec. 224. Strengthening institutional research 
partnerships.--In cases where a research grant involves a 
partnership of colleges and universities, including a minority-
serving institution or a predominately undergraduate 
institution, the Director is required to award funds to at 
least two of the institutions directly, including at least one 
minority-serving or predominately undergraduate institution.
    Sec. 225. National Science Board report on mid-scale 
instrumentation.--Requires the Board to evaluate the need for 
mid-scale research instrumentation (instrumentation that falls 
between the Major Research Instrumentation program and the 
Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction program), 
and provide recommendations regarding how the Foundation can 
best address those needs.
    Sec. 226. Sense of Congress on overall support for research 
infrastructure at the Foundation.--Expresses the sense of 
Congress that the Foundation should strive to keep the 
percentage of the Foundation budget devoted to research 
infrastructure in the range of 24 to 27 percent, as recommended 
in the 2003 National Science Board report, ``Science and 
Engineering Infrastructure for the 21st Century.''
    Sec. 227. Partnerships for innovation.--Requires the 
Director to carry out a program to support partnerships between 
institutions of higher education and private sector entities in 
order to promote innovation and increase the economic and 
social impact of the research. Gives priority to partnerships 
that involve one of the top 100 research institutions and 
either a minority-serving institution, a primarily 
undergraduate institution, or a 2-year college.
    Sec. 228. Prize awards.--Requires the Director to establish 
a 3-year pilot program to award innovation inducement cash 
prizes in research areas supported by the Foundation.

           Subtitle C--Stem Education and Workforce Training

    Sec. 241. Graduate student support.--Requires the Director 
to increase or decrease funding for the Integrative Graduate 
Education and Research Traineeship (IGERT) program at the same 
rate as the Graduate Research Fellowship (GRF) program. 
Requires that at least half of the total funds for IGERT and 
GRF come from the R&RA account. Requires the Director to 
increase the current cost of education allowance for awards 
made through the GRF program by $1,500.
    Sec. 242. Postdoctoral fellowship in stem education 
research.--Requires the Director to establish a postdoctoral 
fellowship program to encourage recent doctoral degree 
graduates in the STEM fields to pursue STEM education research 
and become leaders in STEM education reform.
    Sec. 243. Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program.--Lowers 
the required amount of institutional matching for Noyce grants 
under Section 10A (master teachers and STEM professionals) from 
50 to 30 percent and requires that the institutional match be 
met in cash only.
    Sec. 244. Institutions serving persons with disabilities.--
Ensures that institutions of higher education that are 
chartered to serve students with disabilities can benefit from 
STEM bridge programs and from research partnerships with major 
research universities funded by NSF. Clarifies that nothing in 
this section shall be construed to amend or otherwise affect 
any of the current statutory definitions for minority-serving 
institutions.
    Sec. 245. Institutional integration.--Requires the Director 
to award grants to colleges and universities for the 
integration of Foundation funded projects at those institutions 
in order to increase collaboration across funded projects and 
expand the impact of such projects.
    Sec. 246. Postdoctoral research fellowships.--Requires the 
Director to establish a Foundation-wide postdoctoral research 
fellowship program, with priority given to proposals for 
interdisciplinary research and high-risk, high-reward research.
    Sec. 247. Broadening participation training and outreach.--
Requires the Director to provide education and training to 
Foundation staff and review panels on effective tools for 
increasing participation in STEM by underrepresented groups.
    Sec. 248. Transforming undergraduate education in STEM.--
Requires the Director to award grants to colleges and 
universities to reform undergraduate STEM education in their 
institutions, and specifies that proposals must include 
evidence of institutional support for, and commitment to, the 
proposed reform effort.
    Sec. 249. 21st Century graduate education.--Requires the 
Director to award grants to institutions of higher education 
for the implementation or expansion of reforms in graduate STEM 
education that emphasize preparation for diverse STEM careers.
    Sec. 250. Undergraduate Broadening Participation Program.--
Prohibits the Foundation from consolidating the Historically 
Black Colleges and Universities Undergraduate Program, the 
Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation program, and 
the Tribal Colleges and Universities Program into a single 
program in fiscal year 2011 (as proposed in the agency's budget 
request). Requires the Director to develop and submit a plan to 
Congress clarifying the objectives and rationale prior to any 
consolidation of the programs.
    Sec. 251. Grand challenges in education research.--Requires 
NSF and the Department of Education (ED) to identify, 
prioritize, and develop strategies to address grand challenges 
in research and development for pre-K-12 STEM education. 
Requires NSF and ED to collaborate on a report to Congress 
outlining the grand challenges, the role of each agency in 
addressing the challenges, metrics for assessing progress 
toward meeting the challenges, how the agencies will 
disseminate the results of the research, and how the agencies 
will support the implementation of best practices.
    Sec. 252. Research experiences for undergraduates.--
Requires the Director to award grants to institutions of higher 
education, nonprofit organizations, or consortia of such 
institutions and organizations, for sites designated to provide 
research experiences for 10 or more undergraduate STEM 
students. Requires that research grant recipients planning to 
include undergraduate students in carrying out their research 
request support for the undergraduate students as part of the 
research proposal itself rather than as a supplement to the 
research proposal.
    Sec. 253. Laboratory Science Pilot Program.--Extends a 
pilot program at the Foundation to improve laboratory learning 
at high-needs high schools.
    Sec. 254. STEM Industry Internship Program.--Authorizes the 
Director to award grants to institutions of higher education to 
establish partnerships with local and regional private sector 
entities for the purpose of helping undergraduate students 
connect internship experiences with STEM coursework.
    Sec. 255. Tribal Colleges and Universities Program.--
Requires the Director to award grants to tribal colleges and 
universities to enhance STEM education at such institutions and 
to increase the retention and graduation rates of Native 
American students pursuing STEM degrees.

                       TITLE III--STEM EDUCATION

    Sec. 301. Coordination of Federal STEM education.--
Establishes an interagency committee to coordinate Federal 
programs and activities in support of STEM education. Requires 
this committee to develop a STEM education strategic plan to 
inform program and budget planning for agencies and to 
establish and maintain an inventory of federally sponsored STEM 
education activities, including documentation on program 
assessments. Requires the Director of OSTP to submit an annual 
report to Congress including a description and level of funding 
of the STEM education programs and activities of each 
participating Federal agency for the previous and current 
fiscal years.
    Sec. 302. Advisory Committee on STEM education.--Requires 
the President to establish an advisory committee on STEM 
education responsible for soliciting input from a variety of 
stakeholder groups in order to offer guidance to the President 
on how to better align Federal programs with the needs of 
States and school districts, and to improve connectivity 
between public and private STEM education efforts.
    Sec. 303. STEM education at the Department of Energy.--
Clarifies the role of the Department in contributing to STEM 
education, including energy systems science and engineering 
education, at all levels. Specifies the kinds of STEM education 
programs and activities that the Department is authorized to 
carry out. Requires the Secretary to appoint or designate a 
Director of STEM education with responsibility to oversee and 
coordinate all STEM education programs and activities across 
the Department. Requires the Director to develop, implement, 
and update a STEM education strategic plan for the Department, 
and maintain an online inventory of STEM education programs at 
the Department. Requires the Secretary to consult and partner 
with the Department of Education and the National Science 
Foundation on STEM education activities, when appropriate. 
Requires the Secretary to award grants to colleges and 
universities to develop or expand the energy systems science 
and engineering education capabilities of the institution and 
provide support to graduate students pursuing such courses of 
study.
    Sec. 304. Green energy education.--Authorizes the Secretary 
to contribute funds to NSF's Integrative Graduate Education and 
Research Traineeship program to support graduate training in 
energy research and authorizes the Secretary to contribute 
funds to NSF for curriculum development activities in the 
design and construction of high performance buildings.

        TITLE IV--NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY

    Sec. 401. Short title.--``National Institute of Standards 
and Technology Authorization Act of 2010''.
    Sec. 402. Authorization of appropriations.--Authorizes a 
total of $5.628 billion for the National Institute of Standards 
and Technology (NIST) for FY 2011 through FY 2015. The total 
consists of authorization levels of $1.012 billion in FY 2011, 
$1.035 billion in FY 2012, $1.137 billion in FY 2013, $1.188 
billion in FY 2014, and $1.256 billion in FY 2015.
    Includes within the total authorization a total of $3.495 
billion for NIST labs for FY 2011 through FY 2015. The total 
for NIST labs consists of authorization levels of $620.0 
million in FY 2011, $657.2 million in FY 2012, $696.7 million 
in FY 2013, $738.5 million in FY 2014, and $782.8 million in FY 
2015.
    Includes within the total authorization a total of $589 
million for construction and maintenance of facilities for FY 
2011 through FY 2015. The total for construction and 
maintenance consists of authorization levels of $125 million 
for FY 2011, $85 million for FY 2012, $122 million for FY 2013, 
$124 million for FY 2014, and $133 million for FY 2015.
    Includes within the total authorization $1.545 billion for 
industrial technology services for FY 2011 through FY 2015, 
which includes a total of $681 million for the Technology 
Innovation Program (TIP), a total of $811.2 million for the 
Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program, and a total 
of $53.1 million for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality 
Award program. The total for TIP consists of authorization 
levels of $116 million for FY 2011, $132 million for FY 2012, 
$147 million for FY 2013, $142 million for FY 2014, and $144 
million for FY 2015. The total for MEP consists of 
authorization levels of $141.1 million for FY 2011, $150.9 
million for FY 2012, $161.5 million for FY 2013, $172.8 million 
for FY 2014, and $184.9 million for FY 2015. The total for the 
Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award program includes 
authorization levels for $10 million for FY 2011, $10.3 million 
for FY 2012, $10.6 million for FY 2013, $10.9 million for FY 
2014, and $11.3 million for FY 2015.
    Sec. 403. Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and 
Technology.--Creates the position of the Under Secretary of 
Commerce for Standards and Technology. The current Director of 
NIST would become the Under Secretary until a successor is 
appointed. (This is the same structure as at the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA))
    Sec. 404. Reorganization of NIST laboratories.--Organizes 
the NIST laboratories into the following operational units: the 
Physical Measurement Lab, the Information Technology Lab, the 
Engineering Lab, the Material Measurement Lab, the Center for 
Nanoscale Science and Technology, and the NIST Center for 
Neutron Research. Allows the Director to make future changes to 
the NIST laboratory structure, provided he submit a report to 
Congress before implementing such change.
    Sec. 405. Federal Government standards and conformity 
assessment coordination.--Assigns the Director of NIST the 
responsibility of convening federal departments and agencies to 
coordinate Federal Government policy goals and engagement on 
international technical standards and conformity assessment-
related activities, working with industry and standards 
development organizations. Requires the Director to submit a 
report to Congress which addresses current and anticipated 
international standards issues with the potential to impact 
U.S. competitiveness and innovation capabilities, actions taken 
by the Federal Government to address these issues, and any 
action the Director is taking, or will take, to ensure 
effective Federal Government engagement on technical standards 
and conformity assessment-related issues.
    Sec. 406. Manufacturing extension partnership.--Requires 
MEP Centers to inform local and regional community colleges of 
the skill sets local manufacturers need in their workplace; 
creates an innovative services initiative to assist small and 
medium-sized manufacturers to reduce their energy usage and 
environmental waste and to accelerate the domestic 
commercialization of new product technologies (including 
components of renewable energy systems); requires centers 
perform market analysis to ensure there is market demand for 
these new product technologies; requires NIST to assess its 
administration of the MEP program using the criteria of the 
Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award; reduces the required 
cost share of all MEP Centers for fiscal years 2011 through 
2015 and requires a report from the Under Secretary four years 
after enactment, with his recommendations on cost-share 
provisions; and exempts the MEP Advisory Board from Section 14 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), `Termination of 
advisory committees; renewal; continuation.'
    Sec. 407. Bioscience Research Program.--Establishes a 
Bioscience Research Program at NIST to support the development 
of standard reference materials and measurements to advance 
biologic drug research and development, molecular diagnostics, 
medical imaging technology, and personalized medicine; requires 
that at least one fellow from the postdoctoral fellowship 
program be assigned to the bioscience research program; allows 
the Director to establish University Research Centers through a 
competitive application process to conduct research that 
furthers the objectives of the bioscience research program; 
allows the Director to establish a user facility for industry, 
institutions of higher education, nonprofit organizations, and 
government agencies in order to perform research and testing, 
and provide access to advanced or unique equipment, services, 
materials, and other resources; requires the Director to 
include the bioscience research program in the programmatic 
planning document transmitted to Congress.
    Changes the number of NIST's Visiting Committee on Advanced 
Technology members to vary between 15 and 20 and requires at 
least 13 of those members to be from U.S. industry.
    Sec. 408. Emergency Communication and Tracking Technologies 
Research Initiative.--Requires the Director to establish an 
initiative to support the development of technical standards 
and conformance architecture to improve the operation and 
reliability of emergency communication and tracking 
technologies used in confined spaces, such as underground 
mines, and shielded environments, such as high-rise buildings 
and collapsed structures; requires the Director, as part of 
this initiative, to perform an assessment of the measurement, 
technical standards, and conformity assessment needs for these 
types of technologies and to submit a report on this needs 
assessment to Congress 18 months after enactment.
    Sec. 409. TIP Advisory Board.--Exempts the TIP Advisory 
Board from Section 14 of FACA.
    Sec. 410. Underrepresented minorities.--Requires the 
Director to give consideration to the goal of promoting 
underrepresented minorities in evaluating applications for NIST 
fellowships for university students and post-doctoral 
researchers; requires the Director to give special 
consideration for applications received from teachers at high-
needs schools for the NIST teacher science and technology 
enhancement program.
    Sec. 411. Cybersecurity standards and guidelines.--
Clarifies that the use of cybersecurity standards and 
guidelines developed by NIST for industry and public would not 
be mandatory.
    Sec. 412. Definitions.--Defines the terms `Director' and 
`Federal Agency.'

                          TITLE V--INNOVATION

    Sec. 501. Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship.--
Requires the Secretary of Commerce to establish an Office of 
Innovation and Entrepreneurship to foster innovation and the 
commercialization of new technologies, products, processes, and 
services; specifies the duties to be carried out by the Office; 
establishes an Advisory Council on Innovation and 
Entrepreneurship to provide advice to the Secretary.
    Sec. 502. Federal loan guarantees for innovative 
technologies in manufacturing.--Requires the Secretary of 
Commerce to establish a program to provide loan guarantees to 
small- and medium-sized manufacturers; defines eligible 
projects as projects to reequip, expand, or establish 
manufacturing facilities in the United States to use an 
innovative technology or an innovative process in 
manufacturing, or to manufacture an innovative technology 
product or an integral component of such product. Limits the 
amount of a loan guarantee to an amount equal to 80 percent of 
the loan; sets out specific limitations on the authority to 
make loan guarantees; lays out requirements and limitations in 
the case of default; permits the Secretary to pay principal and 
interest to lenders or other holders of the loan in specified 
circumstances; sets out terms and conditions for loan 
guarantees and requires that the Secretary consult with the 
Secretary of the Treasury in establishing terms and conditions 
for loan guarantees.
    Requires the Secretary to charge and collect fees for loan 
guarantees; mandates that borrowers, lenders, and other 
appropriate parties keep pertinent records and documents to 
facilitate an effective audit; provides for the full faith and 
credit of the United States for the payment of loan guarantees; 
requires the Secretary to issue final regulations before making 
any loan guarantees and specifies specific items that must be 
included in the final regulations.
    Requires the Secretary to enter into an arrangement with an 
independent auditor for annual evaluations of the program and 
requires the Comptroller General to conduct an annual review of 
the Secretary's execution of the program; mandates a report to 
Congress containing a summary of all activities carried out 
under the program.
    Requires that the Secretary ensure that activities carried 
out under the program are coordinated with, and do not 
duplicate the efforts of, other loan guarantee programs within 
the Federal Government.
    Authorizes the Secretary to use centers established under 
Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program to provide 
information about the program and to conduct outreach to 
potential borrowers.
    Requires the Secretary to promulgate regulations and 
policies to carry out the program in accordance with Office of 
Management and Budget Circular No. A-129.
    States that it is the Sense of Congress that no loan 
guarantee shall be made unless the borrower agrees to use a 
federally-approved electronic employment eligibility 
verifications system to verify the employment eligibility of 
persons hired during the contract term by the borrower to 
perform employment duties within the U.S. and persons assigned 
by the borrower to perform work within the United States on the 
project.
    Defines ``cost'', ``innovative process'', ``innovative 
technology'', ``loan guarantee'', ``obligation'', and 
``program''.
    Provides an authorization of $50 million for each of Fiscal 
Year 2011 through Fiscal year 2015 for the cost of loan 
guarantees; provides an authorization of such sums as are 
necessary for the Secretary to make payments of principal and 
interest under subsection (g).
    Sec. 503. Regional Innovation Program.--Requires the 
Secretary of Commerce to establish a regional innovation 
program to encourage and support the development of regional 
innovation strategies, including regional innovation clusters. 
Authorizes the Secretary to award grants on a competitive basis 
to States, tribes, local governments, nonprofit organizations, 
institutions of higher education, public-private partnerships, 
or economic development organizations for activities relating 
to the formation and development of regional innovation 
clusters; specifies activities for which grants may be used; 
defines eligible recipient; establishes requirements for grant 
applications; limits the amount of any project that the 
Secretary can provide to 50 percent; requires that the 
Secretary ensure that activities funded use and apply research, 
best practices, and metrics developed under the innovation 
research and information program.
    Establishes a regional innovation research and information 
program; specifies the activities of the research and 
information program; permits the Secretary to award research 
grants to support and further the goals of the program; 
requires that the Secretary make data and analysis compiled 
under the research and information program available to other 
Federal agencies, State and local governments, and nonprofit 
and for-profit entities; requires that the Secretary 
incorporate data and analysis relating to any regional 
innovation cluster supported by a grant under subsection (b) 
into the research and information program.
    Requires that the Secretary ensure that activities are 
coordinated with, and do not duplicate the efforts of, other 
programs at the Department of Commerce and other Federal 
agencies; requires the Secretary to explore and pursue ways to 
collaborate with other Federal agencies, including through 
multiagency funding opportunities, on regional innovation 
strategies.
    Requires that the Secretary, within 4 years of enactment, 
enter into a contract with an independent entity, such as the 
National Academy of Sciences, to conduct an evaluation of the 
program, including a recommendation as to whether the program 
should be continued or terminated.
    Defines ``regional innovation cluster''
    Authorizes such sums as are necessary for each of fiscal 
years 2011 through 2015 to carry out the program.

                     TITLE VI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


                     Subtitle A--Office of Science

    Sec. 601. Short Title.--``DOE Office of Science 
Authorization Act of 2010''
    Sec. 602. Definitions.--Defines ``Department'', 
``Director'', ``Office of Science'', and ``Secretary''
    Sec. 603. Office of Science Activities.--Codifies the 
mission and duties of the Office of Science, and directs the 
Secretary of Energy to carry out research activities in science 
supporting the missions of the Department, including programs 
on basic energy sciences, biological and environmental 
research, advanced scientific computing research, fusion energy 
sciences, high energy physics, and nuclear physics.
    Instructs the Department's Under Secretary for Science to 
ensure the coordination with the other activities of the 
Department, and support joint activities among the Department's 
programs.
    Sec. 604.--Basic Energy Sciences Program.--Directs the 
Director of the Office of Science to carry out a program in 
basic energy sciences, including materials sciences and 
engineering, chemical sciences, biosciences, and geosciences, 
for the purpose of providing the scientific foundations for new 
energy technologies. As part of this program, the Director is 
instructed to support: construction and operation of the 
program's major user facilities; competitively awarded energy 
frontier research centers; and relevant accelerator research 
and development activities, in coordination with the Office of 
Science's High Energy Physics and Nuclear Physics programs.
    Sec. 605. Biological and Environmental Research Program.--
Authorizes a program of research, development, and 
demonstration in the areas of biological systems science and 
climate and environmental science.
    The biological systems science research includes activities 
to: establish a virtual systems biology information framework; 
support research on computational biology; continue the 
research of the bioenergy research centers, and expand them to 
include biobased products; and direct the program to develop a 
synthetic biology plan.
    The climate and environment science research includes 
activities to: support the research and coordination of the 
ecosystem observation AmeriFlux Network; develop a next-
generation ecosystem-climate change experiment; continue 
research in regional and global climate modeling; support 
integrated assessment research.
    Sec. 606. Advanced Scientific Computing Research Program.--
Directs the Director to carry out a research, development, 
demonstration, and commercial application program to advance 
computational and networking capabilities to analyze, model, 
simulate, and predict complex phenomena relevant to the 
development of new energy technologies and the competitiveness 
of the United States.
    Instructs the Secretary to produce a plan to integrate and 
leverage the expertise and capabilities of the program, as well 
as other relevant computational programs and resources 
supported by the Federal Government, to advance the missions of 
the Department's applied energy and energy efficiency programs.
    Instructs the Secretary to, at least 18 months prior to the 
initiation of construction or installation of any exascale-
class computing facility, produce a plan detailing the proposed 
facility's cost projections and capabilities to significantly 
accelerate the development of new energy technologies.
    Authorizes research and development activities in applied 
mathematics, high-end computing software development, and next-
generation computing architectures and platforms to support the 
missions of the Department.
    Sec. 607. Fusion Energy Research Program.--Directs the 
Director to carry out a fusion energy sciences research and 
enabling technology development program on the scientific and 
engineering challenges to building a cost-competitive fusion 
power plant and a fusion power industry in the United States.
    As part of this program, the Director is instructed to: 
coordinate and carry out the responsibilities of the United 
States with respect to the ITER international fusion project; 
produce a 10-year prioritization plan; support fusion materials 
research and development activities in coordination with the 
Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy; carry out a 
computational project to advance the capability of fusion 
researchers to accurately simulate an entire fusion energy 
system, in collaboration with the Advanced Scientific Computing 
Research program.
    In addition, the Secretary is instructed to establish a 
research and technology development program in inertial fusion 
for energy applications.
    Sec. 608. High Energy Physics Program.--Directs the 
Director to carry out a research program on the elementary 
constituents of matter and energy and the nature of space and 
time.
    As part of this program, the Director is instructed to 
support research in the nature of the neutrino, dark energy, 
and dark matter.
    The Director is also instructed to carry out research and 
development in advanced accelerator concepts and technologies 
to reduce the necessary scope and cost for the next generation 
of particle accelerators.
    Sec. 609. Nuclear Physics Program.--Directs the Director to 
carry out a research program, and support relevant facilities, 
to discover and understand various forms of nuclear matter.
    Director is also instructed to carry out a program for the 
production of isotopes, including the development of techniques 
to produce isotopes, for research applications.
    Sec. 610. Science Laboratories Infrastructure Program.--
Directs the Director to carry out a program to improve the 
safety, efficiency, and mission readiness of infrastructure at 
Office of Science laboratories.
    Sets the minor construction threshold at Office of Science 
laboratories at $10 million, to be adjusted by the Secretary in 
accordance with the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost 
Index, or an appropriate alternative index as determined by the 
Secretary, once every five years after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
    Sec. 611. Authorization of appropriations.-- Authorizes to 
be appropriated to the Secretary of Energy for the activities 
of the Office of Science: $5,247,000,000 for FY 2011; 
$5,614,000,000 for FY 2012; $6,007,000,000 for FY 2013; 
$6,428,000,000 for FY 2014; and $6,878,000,000 for FY 2015.

         Subtitle B--Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy

    Sec. 621. Short title.--ARPA-E Reauthorization Act of 2010.
    Sec. 622. ARPA-E amendments.--Amends section 5012 of the 
America COMPETES Act of 2007 through the following:
    (1) In Goals: Adds provisions to clarify that ARPA-E will 
achieve its goals through both fundamental ``and applied'' 
science, and through ``promoting the commercial application of 
advanced energy technologies''.
    (2) In Responsibilities of the Director: Emphasizes that 
the R&D on manufacturing processes and technologies should be 
for the domestic manufacturing of novel energy technologies.
    (3) In Responsibilities of the Director: Inserts provision 
to specify that the Director will require applicants to 
disclose prior efforts and investments in their technology, 
adopt measures to ensure that ARPA-E funds projects in areas 
not likely to be undertaken by industry alone, and report on 
instances where funding augments efforts undertaken by 
industry.
    (4) Re-designates subsections (f) as (g), and reorders all 
subsections thereafter
    (5) Inserts new subsection ``(f) AWARDS'' to clarify that 
the Director of ARPA-E has the authority to initiate and 
execute the full range of award instruments of the Department, 
including grants, contracts, cooperative agreements, cash 
prizes and other transactions. ``Other Transactions Authority'' 
is a flexible contracting authority granted to the Department 
in Section 1007 of the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005.
    (6) In Personnel: Inserts new paragraph (1) requiring the 
Director to maintain a staff of qualified and experienced 
personnel to serve within ARPA-E.
    Makes changes to clarify that program managers (program 
directors) can direct more than one program, and that program 
managers (program directors) are not required to seek the 
advice of advisory committees or scientific organizations in 
making award selections. Adds to the list of program manager 
(program director) responsibilities identifying cost-sharing 
opportunities for projects, including through possible 
exercising of waiver authority by the Secretary under Section 
988 of EPAct 2005; and identifying ways to transfer successful 
energy technology projects to the marketplace.
    Clarifies that the term of a program manager (program 
director) may be ``up to'' 3 years. Replaces term ``program 
manager'' with ``program director'' to align with current 
practices of ARPA-E.
    Strikes requirement that ARPA-E maintain a staff of 70-120 
employees. Authorizes the Director to select exceptional 
scientific, legal, business, and technical personnel to serve 
as limited terms as Fellows.
    (7) In Reports and Roadmaps: Shifts deadlines for the 
Strategic Vision Roadmap from 2008 and 2011, to 2010 and 2013, 
respectively.
    (8) In Federal Demonstration of Technologies: Strengthens 
existing language to require Director to actively seek 
opportunities to demonstrate ARPA-E technologies through 
procurement by DOE and other federal agencies.
    (9) Inserts new subsection ``(k) Events'' authorizing the 
Director to convene events for the purposes of allowing ARPA-E 
project awardees and finalist to demonstrate technologies to a 
range of stakeholders, and for other purposes as determined by 
the Director. Specifies that funding for events will be 
provided from funds used for technology transfer and outreach.
    (10) In ARPA-E Evaluation: Changes from ``4 years'' to ``6 
years'' the time after establishment at which the National 
Academies will evaluate the performance of ARPA-E.
    (11) In ARPA-E Evaluation: Adds a requirement that the 
lessons learned in the National Academies evaluation of ARPA-E 
shall consider how such lessons may apply to other programs 
within DOE.
    (12) In Funding: Extends Authorization of Appropriations 
for Fiscal Years 2011 through 2015:
        (A) $300,000,000 for fiscal year 2011
        (B) $450,000,000 for fiscal year 2012
        (C) $600,000,000 for fiscal year 2013
        (D) $800,000,000 for fiscal year 2014
        (E) $1,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2015
    (13) In Funding: Strikes Limitation which made fiscal year 
2008 funding for ARPA-E contingent upon the Office of Science 
receiving an increase from 2007.
    (14) In Funding: Increases the amount of funds that shall 
be used for technology transfer and outreach activities from 
2.5 percent to 5 percent of total appropriated funds, 
consistent with the program's goals of advancing technologies 
to commercial application.

                   Subtitle C--Energy Innovation Hubs

    Sec 631. Short title.--Energy Innovation Hubs Authorization 
Act of 2010.
    Sec. 632.--Energy innovation hubs.--(a) ESTABLISHMENT OF 
PROGRAM.--Directs the Secretary to carry out a program to 
create Energy Innovation Hubs that will conduct and support 
research, development, demonstration and commercial application 
of advanced energy technologies. Where practicable these 
activities should occur in a central location. Each Hub created 
shall be focused on a particular unique advanced energy 
technology. The Secretary will ensure that the program is 
coordinated with other DOE research entities so as to avoid 
duplication and shall convene representatives from the Hubs, 
DOE, and any other relevant entities the Secretary find 
appropriate. The Secretary shall also administer each Hub 
through a DOE program with relevant jurisdiction based on a 
Hub's technology focus.
    (b) Consortia.--Outlines the requirements that must be met 
by an applicant consortium in order to be eligible to form a 
Hub. A consortium must be made up of at least two qualifying 
entities who have created a binding agreement documenting the 
partnership agreement, measures to ensure cost-effective 
implementation, a proposed budget, conflict of interest 
procedures, an accounting structure, and an external advisory 
committee. The application made by the consortium to the 
Secretary will be made by one of the consortium's members as a 
prime applicant. The application shall describe the consortium 
agreement and, in the event consortium members will not be in a 
centralized location shall include a communications plan to 
ensure integration of the Hub's activities.
    (c) Selection and schedule.--Establishes the process by 
which the Secretary shall review all consortium applications 
received. The Secretary shall review all Hub applications 
received, and consortia grants will be approved through a 
competitive process. Any grant made to a Hub shall be for a 
period no longer than five years and may be renewed through a 
competitive process.
    (d) Hub operations.--Details that a Hub shall conduct 
multidisciplinary, collaborative research, development, 
demonstration, and commercial application of advanced energy 
technologies. A Hub shall encourage collaboration and 
communication and, whenever practicable, conduct its activities 
at one centralized location. In order to provide greater 
transparency, the Hub shall develop and publish on DOE's 
website all proposed plans and programs. In addition to a 
general duty to monitor project implementation and 
coordination, the Hub shall submit an annual report to the 
Secretary that summarizes all activities and projects, 
expenditures, and external advisory committee members.
    The external advisory committee each Hub is required to 
establish under this section will advise Hub management on 
programs and planned activities, but shall not have decision 
making authority. The advisory committee membership should have 
sufficient expertise to provide guidance on scientific, 
technical, financial, and research management matters. This 
section also requires each Hub to establish procedures to 
address conflicts of interest, consistent with those already 
established by DOE. The Secretary may disqualify an application 
or revoke funds if a failure to disclose any conflict of 
interest is discovered.
    (e) Prohibition on construction.--Prohibits any funds 
granted by the Secretary to a Hub to be used for construction 
of a new building or facility for Hub activities. Furthermore, 
construction of new buildings or facilities shall not be 
considered as part of the non-Federal share of a Hub cost-
sharing agreement. Excluded from this prohibition are any 
buildings or facilities constructed to serve as a test bed or 
any renovations to existing buildings or facilities so long as 
the test bed or renovations are limited to the scope and scale 
of the research.
    (f) Oversight board.--Requires the Secretary to establish 
within the Department an Oversight Board to monitor the Hubs 
and their activities.
    (g) Priority consideration.--Requires the Secretary to 
establish within the Department an Oversight Board to monitor 
the Hubs and their activities.
    (h) Definitions.--Provides the definitions for terms used 
within the bill, including: Advanced Energy Technology, Hub, 
Institution of Higher Education, Qualifying Entity, and 
Secretary.
    (i) Authorization of Appropriations.--Provides 
authorizations for each of the fiscal years 2011 through 2015 
as follows:
        (1) $110,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
        (2) $135,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
        (3) $195,000,000 for fiscal year 2013;
        (4) $210,000,000 for fiscal year 2014; and
        (5) $210,000,000 for fiscal year 2015.

         Subtitle D--Cooperative Research and Development Fund

    Section 641. Short title.--subtitle is cited as the 
``Cooperative Research and Development Fund Authorization Act 
of 2010''.
    Section 642. Cooperative Research and Development Fund.--
Directs the Secretary of Energy to make funds available to 
National Laboratories to pay the federal share of cooperative 
research and development agreements (CRADA's). Provides for 
special consideration of small business in CRADA's. Directs the 
Secretary to report annually how funds were expended. 
Authorizes such sums as are necessary to carry out the 
subtitle.

                        TITLE VII--MISCELLANEOUS

    Sec. 701. Sense of Congress.--States that it is the Sense 
of Congress that programs and activities authorized in the bill 
that correspond to the recommendations of the National Academy 
of Sciences' 2005 report entitle ``Rising Above the Gathering 
Storm'' remain critical to maintaining long-term United States 
economic competitiveness and shall receive priority funding.
    Sec. 702. Persons with disabilities.--Requires that, for 
purposes of the activities and programs supported by the bill, 
institutions of higher education chartered to serve large 
numbers of students with disabilities and those with programs 
serving or those serving disabled veterans receive special 
consideration and have a designation consistent with the 
designation for other institutions that serve populations 
underrepresented in STEM.
    Sec. 703. Veterans and service members.--Requires that, in 
awarding scholarships and fellowships under the bill, an 
institution of higher education give preference to applications 
from veterans and service members.

                         VIII. Committee Views


                 TITLE I--SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY


Section 105--Research in areas of national importance

    The Committee joins the National Nanotechnology Advisory 
Panel in applauding the NNI agencies in the development of 
three signature initiatives in the grand challenge areas of 
Nanotechnology Applications for Solar Energy, Sustainable 
Nanomanufacturing, and Nanoelectronics for 2020 and Beyond. The 
Committee agrees with the NNI agencies that the long-term 
vision for nanomanufacturing is the creation of complex 
nanodevices through low cost, high-rate nanomanufacturing 
processes that use ``bottom-up'', self-assembly methodologies. 
An important component of this vision is the design and 
synthesis of uniform, robust nanoelements and other 
nanomaterials.
    The Committee also recognizes that the U.S. economy has 
benefited greatly over the past decades from advances in 
semiconductor technology, but the ability to scale today's 
silicon-based technology is rapidly approaching fundamental 
limitations. The transition to nanoelectronics will be as 
significant as the transition from mechanical electrical 
switches to vacuum tubes, or from single solid state 
transistors to integrated circuits. Additionally, the Committee 
recognizes the important role public-private research 
partnerships have played in addressing technological challenges 
and highlights the Nanoelectronics Research Initiative as a 
successful model of government-industry-university 
collaboration. The Committee encourages Federal science 
agencies to continue to promote and support collaborative 
research efforts in nanotechnology.

Section 123--Interagency Public Access Committee

    The Committee is concerned about the possibility of Federal 
agencies working separately to develop disconnected policies 
related to the dissemination of the results of federally funded 
research. Not only would such fragmentation put an undue burden 
on the stakeholder communities that answer to multiple 
agencies, it would also have unintended consequences with 
respect to inhibiting, rather than facilitating transformative 
advances at interdisciplinary interfaces. Therefore, the 
Committee included this provision to ensure that agencies 
collaborate on the complex technical and research issues that 
underlie the development of any public access policies, 
especially interoperability across agencies, across science and 
engineering disciplines, and across international borders.
    The Committee is pleased with the contributions made by the 
Scholarly Publishing Roundtable, a group of experts from 
universities, nonprofit and for profit publishers, and 
libraries who were convened by the Committee in 2009 to develop 
broad agreement on recommendations to expand public access to 
the results of federally funded research. The Members of the 
Roundtable went on to produce a report, completed in January, 
2010, in which the Roundtable presented general principles, 
analyses, and recommendations concerning public access. Due to 
the complexity and importance of this issue, the Committee 
urges the Public Access working group required under this 
section to give careful consideration to the Roundtable's 
report and to develop a balanced process for seeking advice 
from and collaborating with all parts of the non-Federal 
stakeholder community as it carries out its responsibilities in 
coordinating Federal science agency research and policies 
related to the dissemination and long-term stewardship of the 
results of unclassified research. Furthermore, the Committee 
urges each of the Federal science agencies to similarly engage 
in a meaningful collaboration with stakeholder groups in the 
development of any agency policies on public access.

                 TITLE II--NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Section 211--Definition of STEM

    For the purposes of Title II of this Act, the term `STEM' 
should be understood to be an umbrella term that covers every 
academic discipline and research area supported across the 
entire Foundation, including discipline based education 
research. Where the term `STEM' is used elsewhere in this Act, 
it is likewise meant to cover all disciplines supported by the 
relevant agency, or in the case of the PCAST and NSTC 
committees established in Title III, STEM should be understood 
to encompass the entire breadth of Federally supported research 
areas.

Section 214--Broader impacts review criterion

    The Committee understands that the purpose of the broader 
impacts review criterion, first applied by NSF in the mid-
1990's, is to increase the impact of NSF supported research on 
individual and societal well being. The Committee applauds the 
National Science Board for having recommended a broader impacts 
review criterion, and believes it should be applied across more 
agencies than just NSF. The specific list of goals in 
subsection (a) was included in a report to Congress by the 
Foundation in 2008, as requested in the 2007 America COMPETES 
Act. The Committee chose not to amend that list developed by 
the Foundation in 2008. However, the Committee understands that 
this list may and perhaps should evolve over time, and does not 
intend to preclude the National Science Board from launching a 
more in-depth, comprehensive review of either the goals or 
implementation of the Foundation's merit review criteria.
    However, the Committee is concerned that this criterion has 
been in place for more than 10 years now with little effort put 
toward evaluation of its impact or toward holding anyone, 
including NSF funded investigators, accountable for their 
efforts to satisfy the criterion. The Committee understands 
that these same concerns have been echoed widely by 
stakeholders, including during NSF hosted workshops on this 
topic. The Committee believes that if a broader impacts review 
criterion is to be applied at all, it should be treated with 
the same rigor as the scientific merit review criterion. The 
intent of Sec. 214 is ensure such rigor, not by putting more 
burden on the individual investigators, but by putting more 
burden on the institutions and other organizations with 
expertise to assist individual investigators in achieving the 
goals of the review criterion. The Committee also encourages 
partnerships among institutions of higher education, and 
between institutions and other organizations, such as science 
museums, with expertise and resources to help investigators 
achieve one or more of the broader impacts goals.
    While, to the extent practicable, investigators and 
institutions should employ evidence-based strategies and models 
to meet the chosen goal(s) of the broader impact criterion, as 
described in subsection (b)(2), the Committee does intend to 
leave room for innovation within the broader impacts portion of 
a proposal. This is particularly applicable to very large 
grants, such as Centers grants, and awards such as the CAREER 
awards that explicitly integrate education and research. 
Regarding Centers, the Committee has heard concerns that for 
such large grants, the researchers are too often disconnected 
from the education/outreach component, which may be overseen by 
separate staff. The Committee encourages the Foundation and the 
awardees to put more effort into integrating education and 
research efforts across all grants.

Section 216--Collection of data on demographics of faculty

    The Committee intends for the Foundation, to the extent 
practicable, to use existing faculty demographic data sources 
and survey mechanisms utilized by other Federal agencies, 
including data collected and maintained by the National Center 
for Education Statistics at the Department of Education. 
Furthermore, the Committee does not expect institutions of 
higher education to have to report duplicative faculty 
demographic data to multiple Federal agencies, but instead 
expects the Foundation to work cooperatively with appropriate 
Federal statistical agencies to acquire such data.

Section 224--Strengthening institutional research partnerships

    The Committee has been hearing for years that institutions 
with significantly less research capacity than the major 
research universities, especially minority serving 
institutions, are too often added to proposals as an 
afterthought by the lead university to make the proposal appear 
stronger with respect to satisfying the broader impacts review 
criterion. This practice is shortsighted and not in keeping 
with the purpose of such partnerships or the broader impacts 
review criterion. The Committee expects that any partnership 
funded by NSF be a true partnership that engages all players in 
the development and shaping of the proposal from the beginning. 
That does not mean the budget or research activities have to be 
split evenly among partner institutions; it simply means that 
both the needs and the unique strengths of the secondary 
institutions should be respected and taken into account in the 
development of the proposal. While it is not a research 
partnership, the Committee points to the astronomy bridge 
program between Fisk University and Vanderbilt University as an 
example of the kind of mutually beneficial partnership that 
should be emulated across all NSF funded partnerships.

Section 226--Support for research infrastructure

    The range of 24-27 percent cited in this provision is meant 
to capture the entire breadth of research infrastructure 
funding at the Foundation, including MREFC, all of the 
maintenance and operations costs for MREFC projects being 
supported by the research directorates, cyberinfrastructure, 
major research instrumentation (MRI), and the several national 
centers and mid-scale facilities supported by the Foundation, 
such as the National Center for Atmospheric Research.

Section 227--Partnerships for innovation

    The Committee understands that Partnerships for Innovation 
is currently undergoing review and likely to be re-envisioned 
through workshops and other activities that solicit stakeholder 
input on how to make the program most effective. The committee 
intends the language included in the bill to be flexible enough 
to allow the program to evolve, while maintaining key 
components, such as strong partnerships between and among 
institutions of higher education and industry, and building the 
capacity of colleges and universities and their researchers to 
transfer the knowledge they create into jobs and into improved 
social and economic well being for their regions and for the 
Nation. The Committee intends for the term ``social enterprise 
non-profit organizations'' to refer to non-profit social 
entrepreneurial ventures harnessing the power of technology for 
social benefit, for example a non-profit organization that 
develops specialized technologies for the disabled.

Section 228--Prize awards

    The Committee recognizes that an innovation inducement 
prize program falls outside the Foundation's current experience 
for supporting basic research. However, the Committee believes 
that such a program is just one more tool to stimulate high-
risk research that could potentially lead to transformative 
advances with far-reaching benefits for society. The Committee 
established this program as a pilot program to provide the 
Foundation with the opportunity to learn from the program and 
report back to Congress before the Administration or Congress 
decides whether to broaden it to a permanent program within the 
Foundation. Subject to availability of funds, the Committee 
expects the Foundation to hold more than one competition under 
this pilot program, and ideally 3-5 competitions so that the 
agency gains enough experience to make evidence-based 
recommendations on whether and how to proceed with such a 
program in the long term.
    The Committee intends the language in subsection (g)(4) to 
prevent so-called ``double-dipping'' into Federal funds. In 
other words, the Committee intends for an eligible researcher 
to pursue the research specific to the prize topic on his or 
her own time and without Federal funds. The Committee does 
recognize the incremental nature of science, and does not 
intend to exclude from eligibility a researcher who has used 
Federal funds to contribute to a body of knowledge upon which 
the prize-winning research is built, provided that he/she has 
not received a Federal research grant to carry out the specific 
research for which the prize is being awarded and is not 
diverting funds from a current Federal grant that was awarded 
for a related, but different research question. The same shall 
be true for any undergraduate or graduate student with a 
current (at the time of the prize announcement) Federal 
scholarship, fellowship, or research internship to pursue the 
specific area of research for which the prize is being awarded. 
A researcher who may have previously received such a 
scholarship, fellowship or internship in another researcher's 
laboratory may be eligible provided the other criteria 
described here are met.

Section 241--Graduate student support

    The Committee chose to tie the growth of the IGERT program 
to that of the GRF program because our effort to achieve the 
same goal through provision of separate authorization levels 
for each program in the 2007 COMPETES Act went unheeded. The 
IGERT program has been flat-funded for 2 years now, and the 
Committee is concerned that the Administration will maintain 
this trend in coming years. The Committee does not intend for 
either program to cut into the many other valuable programs in 
the EHR budget, however the Committee continues to support the 
role of EHR in managing and maintaining budgets for both of 
these graduate programs.
    In subsection (d), the Committee raises the cost of 
education allowance for graduate fellowships and scholarships 
from the current level of $10,500 to $12,000. However, for any 
case in which the cost of education at an institution is less 
than $12,000, the Committee expects that the difference will be 
applied toward other allowances under the fellowship, including 
the stipend and any additional allowance that may be included 
as a standard allowance for all fellows under the GRF or IGERT 
programs.

Section 242--Postdoctoral Fellowship in STEM education research

    The Committee encourages the Director to award STEM 
education research fellowships under this section with 
consideration given to how the research to be supported is 
coordinated with the broader science education community and 
contributes to the systematic accumulation of knowledge on STEM 
education.

Section 243--Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship program

    As it recommended in 2007, the Committee continues to 
expect that the preponderance of the funds for this program 
will go directly to participants in the form of scholarships 
and stipends. But the Committee also understands that a 
significant percentage of the funds should be used in capacity-
building activities, as defined in the 2007 Act. The Committee 
also understands that the resources needed to initiate a 
teacher education program may exceed the level needed for 
steady state operation of the program. The Committee expects 
that NSF will ensure that resources are allocated under the 
program to ensure a sufficient investment in capacity-building 
activities, so that the program does not merely hand out 
scholarships and stipends but rather reforms the way teachers 
are educated.
    Since requiring the non-Federal matching requirement under 
Section 10A of Noyce in 2007, the Committee has learned that a 
number of institutions have provided up to 98 percent of the 
match with in-kind resources. While the Committee recognizes 
the need to provide flexibility to institutions in meeting the 
match, including the reduced match provided for under this Act, 
the Committee intends for a majority of the non-Federal match 
to be met in cash, except in the cases of small planning grants 
funded under this program.

Section 245--Institutional Integration

    The language in this section is based on the Foundation's 
new I\3\ program, and is consistent with the common theme of 
institutional transformation that cuts across this entire 
Title. While proposals may be focused entirely on integrating 
large EHR projects at an institution, the Committee also 
encourages the Foundation to solicit proposals that seek to 
institutionalize education and broadening participation efforts 
that may initially be funded through other NSF grants, such as 
Centers grants and CAREER awards.

Section 248--Transforming Undergraduate Education in STEM

    The Committee intends that in cases for which consortia of 
institutions apply for a grant focused on reform in a single 
discipline across multiple institutions, and the relevant 
disciplinary society serves as the convener of the consortia, 
that society, provided it is otherwise eligible for NSF grants, 
may serve as the fiscal agent on the grant.

Section 249--21st Century graduate education

    The Committee is supportive of NSF's GK-12 program, which 
provides graduate students in STEM with the opportunity to 
broaden their skills and translate their science for K-12 
students and teachers, and understands that it has received 
very positive reviews. However, the Committee believes that 
there are many activities that could strengthen and broaden the 
graduate student experience and ensure that such students are 
prepared for diverse careers that utilize their STEM degrees. 
Therefore, it is the intention of the Committee that over the 
next few years, the budget for the GK-12 program, and the 
program itself, be captured by this broader initiative in 
graduate education.
    The Committee recognizes the importance of master's 
programs to prepare future science professionals for careers in 
the business, government and non-profit sectors and intends 
that proposals to implement or expand innovative professional 
science master's degree programs remain eligible for funding 
under this section.

Section 250--Undergraduate Broadening Participation program

    In Sec. 7033 of the 2007 America COMPETES Act, the Congress 
authorized a program to enhance the quality of undergraduate 
STEM education at Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) and to 
increase the number of Hispanic students receiving associate's 
and baccalaureate degrees in STEM, as well as the number of 
Hispanic students continuing on to pursue graduate studies in 
STEM. The Committee understands that the Foundation needed time 
to hold workshops and solicit community input on how to shape 
such a program to make it most effective for its intended 
purposes, and is now carrying out a comprehensive review of its 
entire portfolio of undergraduate broadening participation 
programs. However, it remains the intention of the Committee 
that the Foundation award grants that take into account the 
unique needs and challenges of Hispanic students pursuing STEM 
studies at those institutions and that allow HSIs to shape the 
proposals to meet their own institutions' and students' needs 
in order to achieve the goals of Sec. 7033 of the 2007 Act.
    The Committee expects any plan by NSF to realign or 
consolidate existing undergraduate broadening participation 
programs to be developed in full consultation and collaboration 
with all affected communities and institutions.

                       TITLE III--STEM EDUCATION


Section 303--STEM education at the Department of Energy

    The Committee intends for this section to provide guidance 
to the Department of Energy on the development of a vision and 
strategy for the role of the Department in contributing to STEM 
education, including energy sciences and engineering education, 
at all levels, both to address the Department's own workforce 
needs, and to contribute more broadly to improving the state of 
STEM education in the United States. Furthermore, the Committee 
is concerned about the lack of intra-agency coordination of 
STEM education activities at the Department. Therefore, the 
Committee calls for the appointment or designation of a 
Director of STEM Education, responsible for overseeing and 
coordinating all activities in support of STEM education at the 
Department. The Secretary may choose to house this person 
organizationally within the Office of Science, but the 
Committee intends for the Director to be given responsibility 
to advise on and coordinate all STEM education matters and 
activities across the Department, including those funded by the 
applied energy technology offices. It is preferable that 
colleges and universities have a single portal through which to 
seek information regarding and funding from the Department's 
education programs. Finally, while the Committee recognizes and 
supports the need for the applied energy technology offices and 
their respective National Labs to develop stronger 
collaborations with universities, the Committee urges the 
Department to take seriously its proposed partnership with the 
National Science Foundation in carrying out its education 
programs at both the K-12 and higher education levels. In 
particular, the Committee recommends that the Department find a 
way to partner with the Foundation to co-fund excellent energy-
related proposals submitted to the Foundation's Advanced 
Technological Education program rather than establishing a 
similar but separate 2-year college program within the 
Department. Finally, with respect to the $55 million in new 
energy education funding proposed in the Department's FY 2011 
budget request, the Committee recommends that the preponderance 
of funding under that proposal go toward the higher education 
activities described in this section.

        TITLE IV--NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY


Section 403--Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology

    By elevating the Director of NIST to the level of an Under 
Secretary, the Committee anticipates and expects that NIST will 
play a more active role in federal innovation and standards 
policy, in keeping with NIST's mission and role as outlined by 
Congress in its original 1901 statute. This is particularly 
true in areas where the development and maintenance of 
technical standards support a national need and policy, such as 
in electronic health care records, smart grid, electronic 
voting equipment, the World Trade Center collapse 
investigation, and cybersecurity. In the past, NIST has been 
reticent to fully engage in its original mission. The Committee 
strongly supported the elevation of Dr. Patrick Gallagher to 
become the 14th NIST Director due to the sense of leadership 
and vision he has already brought to NIST. It is our intent to 
fully support Dr. Gallagher in his endeavors to reinvigorate 
NIST to meet its original Congressional mandate. As a measure 
of our confidence, we felt that by elevating the NIST Director 
to an Under Secretary level, NIST would have a greater voice 
and impact in Administration deliberations.

Section 404--Reorganization of NIST laboratories

    The Committee endorses the Administration's concept of a 
more multidisciplinary and streamlined laboratory structure at 
NIST. The Committee expects the structure to result in more 
efficient operations and a more proactive and responsive 
approach to industry measurement needs. The current laboratory 
structure and mission statements are more than twenty years old 
and the basic tenant of Moore's law would conclude that such 
structure is sadly out of date. The Committee expects NIST to 
quickly implement the proposed lab organization. In addition, 
the Committee is well aware that technology innovation is not 
static and certainly not on twenty-year cycles. The Committee 
encourages critical self-examination by NIST to ensure its 
activities and structure meet current and near-term technical 
needs of industry.

Section 405--Federal Government standards and conformity assessment 
        coordination

    The Committee has long been aware of the often confused and 
conflicting response by the U.S. Government to international 
technical standards issues dating back to a set of oversight 
hearings the Committee initiated in the mid-nineties. The 
Administration has also recognized this problem in its recent 
Cyberspace Policy Review, in which one of the recommendations 
was the need for a single locus in the Federal Government to 
formulate U.S. Government policy related to international 
cybersecurity technical standards. The Committee expects NIST 
to take a much more central and active role within the Federal 
Government and in coordination with appropriate private sector 
entities in developing a coordinated U.S. Government approach 
to international standards issues. The Committee does not want 
to see repetitions of the confused U.S. Government response as 
occurred in the Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) 
Authentication Privacy Infrastructure (WAPI) and international 
biofuel standards issues. In the current global competitive 
environment, we need a proactive U.S. Government approach.

Section 406--Manufacturing extension partnership

    The Committee expects the MEP program to increase its ties 
to community colleges by giving the colleges the information 
necessary to produce students with the technical skills sets 
required by local and regional small and medium-sized 
enterprises (SMEs). This is an important component in improving 
the competitiveness of SMEs and the employment opportunities of 
the American workforce. American SMEs are facing unprecedented 
global economic challenges; SMEs provide good high paying jobs 
to a significant portion of the American workforce. It is 
imperative that Congress do everything possible to ensure 
American SMEs can rise to these challenges. Therefore the 
Committee expects MEP to implement the Innovative Services 
Initiative immediately and forcefully. In addition, MEP must 
establish performance metrics and a monitoring regime to ensure 
this initiative is effective and that taxpayers' dollars are 
being spent to their benefit.
    The change in the MEP Center cost share immediately 
addresses the funding issues resulting from a lack of state 
revenue and the difficulty and appropriateness of a fee-based 
service for SMEs in the current economic climate. The Secretary 
needs to implement the revised cost-share provisions beginning 
in Fiscal Year 2011. MEP is based on the concept of a 
partnership between the Federal Government, state governments, 
and the SME community. In the current economic climate, the 
Federal Government needs to be an active and supportive element 
of this partnership. The Committee expects the recommendations 
contained in the Secretary's required report will inform future 
decisions concerning the long-term sustainability of MEP 
Centers.

Section 407--Bioscience Research Program

    During the past several budget cycles, NIST has announced a 
new initiative in the biosciences. This Committee has strongly 
supported these initiatives and Congress has always provided 
the requested funding. It is with regret that the Committee 
notes that NIST has done little to implement these past 
proposed initiatives. Both the FDA and industry have exhorted 
NIST to develop a more vigorous measurement science program to 
support growth in the fields of biologics and personalized 
medicine. The Committee believes it is necessary to more 
actively engage NIST's attention to these burgeoning fields 
which have the potential to revolutionize disease treatment. It 
is time for NIST to move forward with this issue. The Committee 
expects NIST to develop a comprehensive and industry-responsive 
measurement program in this field. The Committee will continue 
close oversight of NIST's activities.
    The Committee charges the VCAT with reviewing the 
Bioscience Research Program in its Programmatic Planning 
document. The Committee has expanded the VCAT membership to 
between fifteen and twenty in order to meet this new 
responsibility. The Committee expects the NIST Director to 
select additional VCAT members with the appropriate bioscience 
expertise to guide Congress in the success and utility of 
NIST's efforts in this field. The Committee expects the 
Bioscience Research Program section of the programmatic 
planning document be developed in close consultation with 
industry and the appropriate federal agencies, such as the FDA 
and NIH, to ensure that the Program meets the metrology needs 
of industry and does not duplicate, but rather complements, 
similar programs at other federal agencies.
    When establishing university research centers as a 
component of the Bioscience Research Program, the Committee 
expects the Director to give due consideration to all 
applications. The Committee has held many hearings on the need 
to encourage participation of minority serving institutions in 
R&D and science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 
(STEM) activities of the U.S. Government. The Committee would 
encourage NIST to expand and strengthen its outreach activities 
to all institutions of higher education not forgetting the role 
that Predominantly Black Institutions, Tribal Colleges and 
Universities, and Hispanic-serving institutions play in the 
U.S. science and technology enterprise.

                          TITLE V--INNOVATION


Section 502--Federal loan guarantees for innovative technologies in 
        manufacturing

    The Committee believes that the loan guarantee program for 
innovative technologies in manufacturing will provide small- 
and medium-sized manufacturers access to the capital needed to 
retool to remain globally competitive. The Committee expects 
that the loan guarantee program will also serve an important 
function in helping to transfer promising new manufacturing 
technologies and processes, including those developed through 
federally-supported research and development, into 
manufacturing facilities throughout the United States. In 
addition, the Committee anticipates that the program will help 
in the commercialization of new technologies and products 
dependent on a solid manufacturing base.
    The Committee intends for loan guarantees under the program 
to be made only in conjunction with loans to small and medium-
sized manufacturers. Although the Committee has not defined 
small and medium-sized manufacturers, it has charged the 
Secretary of Commerce with determining the criteria that will 
be used to determine whether a borrower is a small and medium-
sized manufacturer and including the criteria in the final 
regulations that must be published before any loan guarantee 
can be made. The Committee expects that the Secretary will 
review the criteria that other Federal Government programs use 
in determining whether a business is small or medium-sized and 
use similar criteria, if appropriate, for purposes of this loan 
guarantee program. In addition, the Committee believes that the 
Manufacturing Extension Partnership program at the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology may be a useful resource 
to the Secretary in developing the criteria and for conducting 
outreach to potential borrowers.
    The Committee recognizes that there are other loan 
guarantee programs at other Federal agencies, including the 
Small Business Administration and the Department of Energy, and 
that--in some cases--small and medium-sized manufacturers may 
be eligible for loan guarantees under these other programs. The 
Committee is not interested in creating duplicative programs 
and, therefore, has specifically required that the Secretary 
ensure that the activities carried out under this loan 
guarantee program are coordinated with, and do not duplicate 
the efforts of, other loan guarantee programs within the 
Federal Government.

Section 503--Regional Innovation Program

    The Committee believes that regional innovation clusters 
have significant potential for spurring innovation in the 
United States and that the Federal Government can play an 
important role in helping to empower local communities to 
develop regional innovation clusters.
    Although the Committee recognizes that regional innovation 
clusters may be focused on a wide variety of areas and 
industries, the Committee's interest in regional innovation 
clusters is based on its commitment to promoting technological 
innovation. The Committee expects that, in carrying out this 
program, the Secretary will focus the program on regional 
innovation clusters centered on technological innovation.
    The bill includes examples of the types of activities the 
Committee feels are appropriate for Federal Government support 
under the grant program. This includes supporting local 
communities that are seeking to develop new regional innovation 
clusters through activities such as inventorying local assets 
that may provide the foundation for a successful cluster, 
conducting feasibility studies, and carrying out planning 
activities. It also includes supporting efforts by participants 
in early stage regional innovation clusters to develop and 
strengthen the connections that are recognized as being 
critical to successful innovation clusters and to attract other 
participants to the cluster, particularly those that may meet 
needs not met by existing cluster participants.
    The Committee believes that the success and long-term 
viability of a regional innovation cluster is unlikely to be 
achieved without the support and commitment of a wide range of 
stakeholders. For that reason, the Committee expects that the 
Secretary will provide grant support only to those clusters 
that are strongly supported by State and local governments, the 
private sector, and other relevant stakeholders.
    The Committee feels strongly that innovation and the 
development of marketable products and technologies is the goal 
of regional innovation clusters. To this end, the bill requires 
that applicants include in their applications the extent to 
which the regional innovation cluster is likely to stimulate 
innovation, and expects that the Secretary will provide funding 
only to those projects that the Secretary believes are likely 
to stimulate innovation. In addition, the Committee feels that 
it is appropriate for the Secretary to fund efforts by regional 
innovation cluster participants to push new technologies and 
products into the market, which may be facilitated through 
demonstration, technology transfer, and commercialization 
activities.
    The Committee fully expects the grant program and the 
research and information program to complement each other. The 
Committee intends that the information and data gathered from 
regional innovation clusters supported by grants will be 
incorporated into the research and information program, and 
that the research and best practices developed through the 
research and information program be utilized by participants of 
regional innovation clusters supported by grants.
    The Committee recognizes that several different agencies 
have funded, or are interested in funding, regional innovation 
cluster activities. The Committee expects that the Secretary of 
Commerce will make every effort to ensure that this program is 
coordinated with, and does not duplicate the efforts of, any 
programs at other Federal agencies.

                     TITLE VI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Subtitle A--Office of Science

    In 1977, after decades of historic and nationally 
significant Federal support for basic research and scientific 
discovery, what is now known as the Office of Science within 
the Department of Energy was formally established.
    Today it is the single largest supporter of basic research 
in the physical sciences in the United States, providing more 
than 40 percent of total funding for this vital area of 
national importance.
    In section 603, the Committee seeks to institutionalize and 
guide the scope of these activities through codification of the 
Office's mission and duties, calling particular attention to 
the Office's longstanding role in support of science for 
discovery and for national need as well as national scientific 
user facilities.
    Recognizing that the Office does and should continue to 
support a broad range of S&T activities, from basic and applied 
research to technology development, demonstration, and 
commercial application, it is the Committee's expectation that 
basic research should remain a strong focus of these 
activities, and that the Office should continue to strengthen 
coordination and collaboration with the Department's applied 
research and development programs to accelerate the advancement 
of new energy technologies.
    The Committee believes that the user facilities which the 
Office of Science builds, operates, and maintains are a major 
asset to the research infrastructure and overall 
competitiveness of the United States. The Committee also 
recognizes the Office's strong project management record, 
particularly relative to the rest of the Department. As such, 
and consistent with the recommendations of the report of the 
U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-08-641, the 
Committee recommends that DOE: (1) consider adopting 
department-wide selected practices from the Office of Science's 
independent project review process and (2) review and 
strengthen, as appropriate, DOE's department-wide project 
management guidance to ensure that each project's technical 
goals are clearly defined.
    Given the sizable U.S. taxpayer investment in the 
construction of these facilities, the Committee recommends full 
practicable operation and utilization of each facility 
following achievement of Critical Decision 4 (CD-4), or 
approval of the start of operations, the final major step in 
the Office of Science's standard project management practices. 
The Committee recognizes that facility operation budgets are 
often the least difficult to cut in order to support other 
Office of Science initiatives. However, the Office should 
always carefully weigh the relatively small cost and high 
benefit to U.S. competitiveness of additional facility 
operation time and support against other potential uses of 
limited research dollars.
    As part of the Department's efforts to contribute to the 
nation's overall competitiveness, the Committee encourages the 
Secretary to develop a clear policy on how to best accommodate 
the research needs of non-proprietary industrial users of 
Office of Science facilities. These are users that have no need 
to patent or hide what they learn, and so paying the standard 
full cost recovery rate to retain all intellectual property 
rights can be an unnecessarily high barrier for them. Yet 
because of the nature of their work, such as incremental 
product development, these users also would not necessarily win 
time on the facility based on scientific merit, which is how 
the remainder of facility runtime is typically allocated. To 
meet these users' needs, the Committee encourages consideration 
of the potential to benefit U.S. economic competitiveness as a 
criterion for allocating non-proprietary runtime.
    The Committee encourages the Secretary of Energy to 
strengthen the role and authorities of the Under Secretary for 
Science to coordinate and direct energy technology research, 
development, and demonstration activities across the 
Department, consistent with the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
    The Committee commends the Office of Science's Basic Energy 
Sciences Program (BES) for its comprehensive strategic planning 
activities over the past decade to better identify and address 
research areas with the potential to achieve significant 
breakthroughs in the development of new energy technologies. 
The Committee finds that the Energy Frontier Research Centers 
are a clear extension of these strategic planning efforts, and 
approves of the Department's policy that: (1) none of these 
Centers are permanent; (2) no federal funding can pay for new 
buildings or facilities to house a Center; (3) they must each 
recompete after a 5 year period or be terminated; and (4) any 
multi-institutional collaboration is eligible to compete.
    The Committee believes that while the High Energy Physics 
Program may be designated the lead for the entire Office of 
Science in accelerator research and development overall, BES 
should take the lead in developing new enabling technologies 
for the next generation of light and neutron source facilities. 
As recommended in the Basic Energy Sciences Advisory 
Committee's May 2009 report on Next-Generation Photon Sources 
for Grand Challenges in Science and Energy, the Committee 
encourages the Department to develop a rigorous research and 
development program into photon sources that may explore ``the 
temporal evolution of electrons, spins, atoms, and chemical 
reactions, down to the femtosecond timescale,'' and ``. . . 
spectroscopic and structural imaging of nano-objects (or 
nanoscale regions of inhomogeneous materials) with nanometer 
spatial resolution and ultimate spectral resolution.'' These 
advances may enable significant breakthroughs in advanced 
energy technologies, health care solutions, materials 
development, and information technologies.
    The Committee notes that while the Office of Science 
manages a significant Advanced Scientific Computing Research 
Program (ASCR) to meet its various mission needs, and DOE's 
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) supports an 
Advanced Simulation & Computing Program, the Department's 
applied energy programs have no such equivalent base of 
computing expertise. The Committee believes that it is 
unnecessary, and potentially counterproductive, to create a 
separate new computational organization for these applied 
programs. Instead, the Committee believes that ASCR should have 
a lead role in coordinating and carrying out all unclassified 
computational research activities across the Department under 
the direction of the Under Secretary for Science. The Committee 
is encouraged by ASCR's recent joint workshops and activities 
with several of the Department's applied programs, and believes 
that an overall plan to address the unique computational 
research needs of the Offices of Energy Efficiency and 
Renewable Energy, Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, 
Fossil Energy, and Nuclear Energy is warranted, even as it 
continues to provide significant support to the other Office of 
Science programs.
    The Committee commends the U.S. high energy physics 
community, and the High Energy Physics Advisory Panel in 
particular, for setting clear, well-reasoned priorities under 
four realistic budget scenarios in the 2008 Particle Physics 
Project Prioritization Panel (P5) report. Section 108 is 
largely reflective of this report's top recommendations, as 
well as those of other recent reports on particle physics 
research priorities by the National Academy of Sciences. The 
Committee finds that the unknown nature of dark energy is one 
of the most fundamental questions facing the field of physics 
today, and strongly encourages the Department to move forward 
on the study of dark energy through both space-based and land-
based projects and experiments. The Committee encourages the 
Department to develop budgets that allow the Office of 
Science's High Energy Physics Program to help sustain a robust 
dark energy research portfolio. The Committee also encourages 
the Department to continue to pursue its collaboration with 
NASA on a space-based dark energy mission, and ensure that the 
mission is consistent with research priorities for such a 
project as identified by the High Energy Physics Advisory 
Panel. Similarly, the Committee urges the Department to explore 
international partnerships that will further its dark energy 
research capabilities.
    The Committee recognizes the significant progress that the 
fusion energy research community has made over the past fifteen 
years in understanding the plasma science that will underlie a 
future fusion reactor. The Committee finds that while the 
Department is already pursuing the critical next steps in 
plasma science of carrying out experimental research to control 
and examine the dynamics of a burning fusion plasma, a stronger 
focus should be concurrently placed on developing the enabling 
technologies required to practically harness fusion power for 
reliable baseload electricity. As such, the ITER international 
fusion project is a necessary but insufficient step on the road 
to commercial fusion power. The Committee encourages the Office 
of Science's Fusion Energy Sciences Program (FES) to closely 
collaborate with BES, ASCR, the Office of Nuclear Energy, and 
NNSA, under the direction of the Under Secretary for Science, 
to address mutual needs for technology development in magnetic 
fusion, inertial fusion, and next-generation fission reactor 
concepts. One focus area of these collaborations should be on 
identifying, characterizing, and developing new materials that 
can endure the intense neutron and heat fluxes expected in 
these reactor environments. The Committee expects the 
Department to consider these nuclear technology needs as it 
develops its prioritization plan, described in Section 607(c). 
This plan is expected to follow the example of the High Energy 
Physics Advisory Panel's P5 report, referenced above, in 
providing clear priorities in magnetic fusion research and 
technology development, including facility construction and 
decommissioning, under four realistic budget scenarios. These 
scenarios need not mirror the four scenarios that the P5 report 
considered (i.e. FY10 + inflation, FY09 + inflation, budget 
doubling from FY07 appropriated level by FY17, and additional 
funding above that level), as the Committee recognizes that the 
construction of ITER may continue to fluctuate and distort 
total FES funding over the next 10 years. Two scenarios that 
the Department should consider analyzing include: (1) flat 
funding at FY10 levels for the non-ITER portion of the FES 
budget; and (2) a path which doubles total funding for FES from 
the FY07 appropriated level before FY20.
    The Committee commends the Secretary for requesting a major 
report from the National Academies which will lay the framework 
for a robust inertial fusion research and technology 
development program. However, the Committee believes that the 
Secretary need not wait for the recommendations of this report 
to begin an explicit, modest version of such a program, as 
several significant research areas have already been well-
identified. These areas include new, potentially less expensive 
ways to achieve ignition, as well as the development of new 
technologies to increase beam repetition rates. While, as 
described above, cross-cutting research areas should be 
strongly considered by the Secretary in developing the magnetic 
fusion prioritization plan, the plan's budget scenarios are not 
expected to take into account a potentially significant new 
inertial fusion program, which may not be housed within the 
Office of Science once it is ultimately established. Provided 
that the Department begins to publicly, explicitly support 
grant awards in inertial fusion research and technology 
development for energy applications on a competitive, merit-
reviewed basis, the Committee does not currently have a 
position on where within the Department this new program should 
primarily reside, or whether its activities should be 
distributed through several DOE subagencies.
    The Committee strongly supports the Nuclear Physics (NP) 
Program's continued stewardship of isotope development and 
production for research applications, an activity which was 
formally transferred from the Office of Nuclear Energy in FY 
2009. The Committee encourages NP to continue its outreach and 
coordination activities with other agencies to meet critical 
applied research, health, and security needs.
    As the Office of Science's overall funding level follows a 
doubling path, the Committee supports setting priorities based 
on national competitiveness for the levels of increased funding 
that each program within the agency receives. However, the 
Committee also strongly supports increased funding above 
inflation for the nuclear physics, high energy physics, and 
fusion energy research programs, and does not support funding 
decreases to these programs outside of expected budget profiles 
for facility construction.
    The Committee recognizes the significant backlog of 
approved but long-delayed infrastructure projects at national 
laboratories, and encourages the Director of the Office of 
Science to provide the necessary expertise and resources to 
carry out its Infrastructure Modernization Initiative Program 
Management Plan, published in September 2008.
    The Committee supports the Deputy Secretary's efforts to 
address significant issues resulting from DOE's regulation of 
its own laboratories for decades. These issues include the 
inappropriate application of many regulations to all of the DOE 
laboratories, regardless of whether the lab primarily conducts 
nuclear security activities or basic experiments in high energy 
physics. This practice can unnecessarily increase the 
administrative costs of the labs that mainly focus on 
unclassified research, and create overlapping restraints on 
management activities that can ultimately hinder a lab's 
ability to contribute to U.S. competitiveness. Lastly, there is 
an inherent conflict of interest in the Department regulating 
itself. The Committee highly recommends that the Deputy 
Secretary consider external federal regulation of its non-
nuclear security laboratories through partnerships with the 
Occupational Health and Safety Administration and the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission.
    The Committee encourages the Secretary to address the 
recommendations of the July 2009 report by the National Academy 
of Public Administration regarding the Department's management 
of human capital. Furthermore, while this report focuses on 
ways to improve DOE's hiring practices, the Committee also 
encourages the Department to improve its accountability 
practices for career employees. Specifically, the Committee 
believes that there should be a far more credible and explicit 
link between job performance and continued employment at the 
Department.

Section 605--Biological and Environmental Research

    The Committee recognizes the important work of the 
Biological and Environmental Research (BER) Program in the 
Office of Science (SC). This section identifies priority areas 
for research that the Committee believes have special 
significance given the current challenges the country faces 
with climate change and dependence on foreign oil. Although 
Section 605 is primarily divided into two activity areas, this 
formatting structure is not intended to imply that the 
Department should treat the biological system science 
activities as distinctly different from the climate and 
environmental science activities. The Committee is not 
mandating a specific organizational structure. The Committee 
encourages the Department to seek synergistic joint activities 
within the program and outside the program with other offices 
in SC and Department wide, specifically with the Office of 
Biomass in the Office Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 
(EERE). Furthermore, specific climate research activities 
should be conducted in collaboration with the United States 
Global Climate Change Research Program (USGCRP).
    The Committee believes the biological system science 
activities are critically important to fundamental science that 
could create breakthroughs in biomass-based liquid 
transportation fuels, biobased products and bioenergy. The 
Committee intends these terms to be interpreted broadly, but 
activities should be focused on the missions of the Department. 
The term biomass-based liquid transportation fuel includes any 
fuel which can be used in the transportation sector. The 
Committee believes that the Department needs to continue to 
conduct research on ethanol from a variety of feedstocks, but 
should broaden its focus to other fuels which can be used in 
existing infrastructure. Fuels that are chemically identical to 
gasoline, diesel, jet-fuel, hydrogen, and other fuels that are 
currently in use, but produced from fossil fuels should be 
researched.
    The Committee recognizes that there are significant 
challenges to achieving the production of sustainably grown 
biomass for fuels, energy, and products. The Committee strongly 
encourages BER to not only focus on energy production from 
plants, microbes, and other biological processes, but also on 
other environmental characteristics. Water consumption, 
nutrient uptake, insect resistance, climate impacts and other 
considerations should be part of the feedstock selection 
process for research conducted at BER, and specifically for 
sequencing at the Joint Genome Institute (JGI).
    The Bioenergy Research Centers (BRCs) established in the 
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 have already 
contributed to the Department's mission of ``promoting 
America's energy security through reliable, clean, and 
affordable energy.'' It is not the intent of the Committee to 
change the current focus of the existing BRCs, which is to 
produce biomass-based liquid transportation fuels. In fact, the 
Committee believes that the majority of research conducted at 
the BRCs should continue to focus on fuels. Still, the addition 
of biobased products in this section is to allow for the BRCs 
to pursue biobased product opportunities that may arise from 
the research they are conducting on fuels. Similar biological 
processes and techniques used to create fuels can be used to 
produce biobased products. The Committee recognizes the 
importance of biobased products because they can replace fossil 
fuel based chemicals and materials. Additionally, biobased 
products, when produced in the biorefinery model (pursued in 
EERE), are high value co-products that can make the overall 
economics of a biorefinery more viable. This is the same 
business model that oil companies use today. Therefore, the 
Committee believes that if a BRC has a breakthrough discovery 
related to a product that is currently being produced using 
fossil fuels as a feedstock, then the BRC should be able to 
pursue that new biobased product discovery. Furthermore, it is 
the intent of the Committee for the three BRCs to be 
geographically distributed across the country. This is 
important because biomass feedstocks are different and face 
different growing, harvesting, transportation and conversion 
needs across the country. This requirement for the BRCs in no 
way implies that the merit-reviewed process should be 
compromised. Additionally, the Committee notes that it is up to 
the discretion of the Director on whether or not the existing 
BRCs should be able to reapply for a 5 year period after the 
first 5 year period is finished. If there is a reapplication 
process, the Committee believes that it should be competitive 
and merit-reviewed.
    The Committee understands the development of the synthetic 
biology plan will require a systematic approach that involves 
several federal agencies, that is transparent to Congress and 
the public, and that provides opportunities for dialogue and 
input from the various stakeholders who will assist in the 
development of the plan. The Committee recognizes that there 
are important environmental, health and safety questions 
associated with the production of genetically modified 
organisms. The Committee believes that there is a role for the 
Federal government to play in the evolving synthetic biology 
industry, but intends for the Department to gather much more 
information before it fully engages. This is especially 
important as it relates to the possible development of standard 
components, parts and systems produced through synthetic 
biology. Intellectual property rights are a particularly 
important area of concern for synthetic biology. Developing the 
appropriate types of public-private partnerships will be 
critical in accelerating the development of fuels, power, and 
products from biological processes.
    The Committee believes the Department's current efforts to 
develop the systems biology knowledgebase are very 
constructive. Specific collaboration with the Advanced 
Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program is critical to 
ensure that there is no duplication of activities. In 
particular steps taken to ``acquire or otherwise ensure the 
availability of hardware for biology-specific computation'' 
should likely be conducted by ASCR, not BER. Furthermore, the 
systems biology knowledgebase will only be as useful as the 
knowledge that it includes. Therefore, the Committee believes 
that as part of the establishment and maintenance of the 
knowledgebase, BER should develop an outreach strategy with the 
purpose of alerting the biology community of this new resource 
and its tools, and a strategy for gathering biology-specific 
information to include in the knowledgebase.
    The Committee finds that the climate and environmental 
activities of the BER program are vital to the Department's 
mission of ``protecting the environment by providing a 
responsible resolution to the environmental legacy of nuclear 
weapons production.'' The Committee recognizes the importance 
of subsurface biogeochemistry research in dealing with the 
nuclear weapon and energy legacy issues of the Department. The 
cost of cleaning up the Department's contaminated sites is a 
tremendous weight on DOE's budget. Therefore, the Committee 
believes that BER's current subsurface research activities 
should be coordinated by the Under Secretary for Science, who 
will be able to prioritize activities to support and accelerate 
the decontamination of DOE sites. Furthermore, the Department's 
role in climate research has been well established, and the 
Committee anticipates that the Department will continue to 
offer its technical and scientific experiences and expertise 
through the United States Global Climate Change Research 
Program (USGCRP). However, the Committee recognizes that 
several federal agencies contribute to the country's 
understanding of climate science and that each agency has 
specific expertise that should not be overlooked.
    In particular the National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration (NOAA) has principal authorities for ocean, 
atmospheric and climate research and observations, as well as 
for managing ocean and marine resources and the coastal zone, 
including evaluating potential environmental impacts of energy 
development in the ocean. NOAA, along with DOE, the National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the National 
Science Foundation (NSF), is also a leader in understanding, 
observing, modeling and predicting climate variability and 
change. Through the USGCRP, the White House Ocean Policy Task 
Force, and other interagency efforts, NOAA works closely with 
the Department to coordinate and leverage oceanic and 
atmospheric science activities and capabilities. The Committee 
encourages the Department to work with NOAA in these areas, as 
they apply to NOAA's mission responsibilities.
    The Committee believes that observations are essential to 
improving climate and earth modeling and to expanding and 
refining our understanding of climate variability and change. 
The Committee recognizes that infrastructure to support 
observations is costly to design, acquire, and maintain and 
that significant resources are also required to properly 
document and archive the data and information obtained from 
them. Therefore, the Committee encourages the Department to 
work closely with the other federal agencies in the USGCRP to 
ensure that the gaps in the AmeriFlux Network are filled in 
with new observation facilities. This is especially important 
as it relates to dynamic terrestrial landscapes such as forests 
which have recently burned or have severe insect infestations. 
The Committee encourages the Department to continue to upgrade 
its facilities and develop appropriate tools to understand the 
flux of other greenhouse gases besides carbon dioxide from 
terrestrial ecosystems. It is critical that the AmeriFlux 
Network work with other observation networks in the United 
States and in other countries. The Committee anticipates the 
need for better observation data due to increased interest in 
the changing climate and the understanding that there will be 
regional impacts to these changes. Therefore, the need to have 
observational data that is distributed throughout the country 
will be very important.
    Furthermore, the Committee finds that research on the 
changing climate is critically important to the global 
community and must be carried out with significant 
collaboration with international partners. As a result, the 
Committee encourages the Department to continue and expand its 
work with international climate scientists. Work directly 
related to regional and global climate modeling is especially 
important as it relates to the Intergovernmental Panel on 
Climate Change (IPCC) 4th Assessment Report. Increased support 
to meet the growing challenges developing from climate change 
should continue to be a priority to the whole BER program.
    The Committee notes the good work of the BER user 
facilities including the Joint Genome Institute, the 
Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Climate Research 
Facility (ACRF) and the Environmental Molecular Sciences 
Laboratory (EMSL). These facilities are critical assets to the 
country and continued success is dependent on regularly 
scheduled upgrades. This is also highly important to 
international competitiveness as other countries such as China 
build their inventory of scientific tools such as sequencing 
machines.

Subtitle B--Advanced Research Projects Agency--Energy

    The Committee intends for ARPA-E to play a variety of roles 
in the nation's energy technology enterprise. The primary 
motivations for establishing ARPA-E were the need for 
transformational technologies that improve U.S. energy security 
and energy efficiency, and reduce the environmental impacts of 
energy. However, both the Gathering Storm panel and Congress 
also advocated for ARPA-E to serve as a new tool for the 
Secretary to use in reinventing Department's approach to energy 
R&D. While it may take years to see the commercial application 
of successful ARPA-E technology projects, it is the Committee's 
view that ARPA-E has already succeeded in providing an 
innovative organizational model within DOE.
    Critics of the DOE's management of research programs 
contend that the stove-piped structure and bureaucratic culture 
of DOE have not been conducive to the rapid development of 
cross-cutting energy solutions and translating basic research 
discoveries into technology applications for the marketplace. 
Potentially revolutionary research may be too risky or multi-
disciplinary to fit into a specific program's mission at DOE, 
and the conventional peer review system tends to favor 
established investigators pursuing incremental advances in 
well-understood concepts. Many contend that, compared with 
investment, the Department has demonstrated limited success in 
pushing technologies beyond the proverbial ``Valley of Death'' 
between government-sponsored R&D and the marketplace.
    The Committee believes that, to pursue truly innovative and 
transformational technology development, ARPA-E must conduct 
projects and be organized in a manner that is fundamentally 
different from that of the traditional DOE approach. To ensure 
rapid decision-making and minimize transactional requirements, 
the reporting structure should remain lean and largely self-
contained. Additionally, staff at ARPA-E are expected to take 
all appropriate measures to ensure that technology projects of 
particular promise can be transferred to the private sector. 
While the Director may choose to enhance the operational 
capabilities of ARPA-E with additional staff, it is the intent 
of the Committee for ARPA-E to grow only as much as is 
necessary to carry out its mission. In order for ARPA-E to 
maintain its unique agility and its independence within DOE, 
the Committee believes that both Departmental and ARPA-E 
leadership must be vigilant in avoiding overly-burdensome 
requirements and impediments imposed by a risk-averse 
Departmental bureaucracy.
    The Committee believes the overwhelming response to the 
initial Funding Opportunity Announcements is further evidence 
that technological innovation is not limited to large research 
universities, national laboratories, and industrial firms. The 
Committee intends for ARPA-E to engage non-traditional research 
performers whenever possible. In the long-term, these 
activities should result in a stronger and more diverse 
domestic community of researchers and technology developers 
focused on pushing transformational energy solutions into the 
marketplace. This requires ARPA-E to be aggressive in reaching 
out to academia (beyond the traditional research universities), 
small businesses, and individual inventors, and to explore 
innovative cost-sharing arrangements that appropriately match 
their financial resources, where applicable. While the 
Committee does not require that a certain percentage of funds 
be awarded to these entities, it is the Committee's view that 
ARPA-E should recognize the critical role they play in our 
nation's technological competitiveness by seeking opportunities 
to fund relevant activities in these sectors.
    It is well known that small businesses are the engines of 
our economy and the driving force of job creation in the U.S. 
Particularly relevant to ARPA-E's mission is the fact that the 
smallest businesses--those with fewer than 25 employees--are 
the greatest sources of technology innovation in the United 
States. This was affirmed in a November 2008 study commissioned 
by the Small Business Administration (SBA). ``An Analysis of 
Small Business Patents by Industry and Firm Size'' noted that: 
``Small businesses develop more patents per employee than 
larger businesses, with the smallest firms, those with fewer 
than 25 employees, producing the greatest number of patents per 
employee. Furthermore, small firm patents tend to be more 
significant than large firm patents, outperforming them in a 
number of categories including growth, citation impact, and 
originality.'' Furthermore, the report identified alternative 
energy as one of 11 of the most promising emerging industries. 
For example, three of four of the most patent-intensive firms 
active in battery manufacturing are small businesses. The 
Committee seeks to further ensure America's technological 
leadership by empowering ARPA-E to actively search for, accept 
solicitations from, and evaluate ideas from America's richest 
and most vibrant source of talented individuals among our 
smallest business entrepreneurs.
    The Committee also believes that ARPA-E should mirror 
DARPA's flexibility and openness in another important aspect. 
Thus far, ARPA-E has issued one broad Funding Opportunity 
Announcement (FOA), and two FOA's focused on specific 
technology areas. All had limited timeframes for applicants to 
submit their proposals. DARPA, in addition to the standard 
calls for specific proposals, issues Broad Agency Announcements 
(BAA) that remain open for extended periods of time and are not 
limited to a narrow field of research or technology. This 
allows Program Directors within DARPA to review and fund 
proposals that may be very promising but do not otherwise fit 
within the scope of a more specific funding opportunity. It is 
the Committee's intent for ARPA-E to be as flexible as 
possible, including through the usage of a rolling solicitation 
similar to DARPA's Broad Agency Announcement, as long as it is 
consistent with the mission of ARPA-E and all federal 
contracting regulations.

Subtitle C--Energy Innovation Hubs

    The Committee on Science and Technology believes that the 
Energy Innovation Hubs program is an important research 
initiative that will provide the Department of Energy with a 
unique and effective means to foster innovative and advanced 
energy technologies. The Committee encourages the Secretary of 
Energy to consider any application for a Hub award that may not 
have all of its activities centrally located, but, through 
modern information and communication technologies, are able to 
replicate the type of synergies between individuals that can be 
fostered through activities conducted at a single location. The 
Committee recognizes the value in a centrally located Hub, but 
believes that an effort to conduct activities under one roof 
should not be undertaken to the detriment of the science to be 
conducted.
    In carrying out the selection of a Hub award winner, the 
Secretary should give priority consideration to consortia in 
which 1 or more members is an institution described in Section 
632(g). However, this section should not be interpreted to mean 
that a Hub must be awarded to a consortium including such one 
of these institutions. Nor should it be construed that Section 
623(g) requires that a Hub must be located at one of these 
institutions.
    The Committee believes that the exception to the 
prohibition on construction in Section 632(e)(2) is a necessary 
exclusion to allow for renovations to existing facilities or 
construction of a test bed when those activities are required 
for the undertaking of necessary research by the Hub to achieve 
its mission. Without this exception, a Hub would be unable to 
build test beds that might be necessary for testing innovative 
technologies in real world situations even if limited in scale 
and scope. In the case of a building innovations Hub this is of 
particular interest. The Committee's concern that a Hub award 
winner may endeavor to misuse funding for the construction of a 
new facility for a purpose other than the research of the 
specified technology focus resulted in the prohibition on 
construction language in Section 632(e)(1). The Committee does 
not intend that the exception to this prohibition in Section 
632(e)(2) should be applied for any reason other than for those 
instances where a Hub must build a test bed or renovate its 
existing facilities. The Committee commends the Secretary to 
take all measures to ensure that the Oversight Board will 
examine any plan for renovation or test bed construction and 
ensure the scope and scale of the undertaking is limited to 
that which is necessary for the research to be conducted. The 
Committee urges the Secretary to appoint members to an 
Oversight Board pursuant to this title that in addition to 
other qualifications required to effectively administer the 
Energy Innovations Hubs program, will have the expertise and 
skill to evaluate any renovations or test bed construction 
undertaken by a Hub. This evaluation should ensure that all 
renovations or test beds are necessary to satisfy the mission 
of the Hub and are not a means to create a long-term facility 
for another purpose. Furthermore, any research to be done at a 
test bed proposed by a Hub should be evaluated to ensure that 
it could not be conducted in a more cost-efficient manner.

                           IX. Cost Estimate

    A cost estimate and comparison prepared by the Director of 
the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 has been timely submitted to 
the Committee on Science and Technology prior to the filing of 
this report and is included in Section X of this report 
pursuant to House Rule XIII, clause 3(c)(3).
    H.R. 5166 does not contain new budget authority, credit 
authority, or changes in revenues or tax expenditures. Assuming 
that the sums authorized under the bill are appropriated, H.R. 
5166 does authorize additional discretionary spending, as 
described in the Congressional Budget Office report on the 
bill, which is contained in Section X of this report.

              X. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate


H.R. 5116--America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010

    Summary: H.R. 5116 would authorize appropriations totaling 
about $86 billion over the 2011-2015 period for several 
agencies to support scientific research, industrial innovation, 
and certain educational activities. Assuming appropriation of 
the necessary amounts, CBO estimates that implementing the 
legislation would cost about $65 billion over the 2011-2015 
period, and about $20 billion after 2015. Enacting the 
legislation could increase revenues (from certain fees) and 
associated direct spending; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures 
would apply. However, CBO estimates that the net effects would 
be negligible for each year.
    H.R. 5116 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact of H.R. 5116 is shown in the following table. 
The costs of this legislation fall within budget functions 250 
(general science, space, and technology), 270 (energy), 370 
(commerce and housing credit), 450 (community and regional 
development), and 800 (general government).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   2011       2012       2013       2014       2015    2011-2015
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

National Science Foundation:
    Research and Related Activities:
        Authorization Level...................      6,020      6,496      7,009      7,562      8,160     35,247
        Estimated Outlays.....................      1,084      3,758      5,379      6,346      7,148     23,715
    Education and Humman Resources:
        Authorization Level...................        945      1,020      1,100      1,187      1,281      5,533
        Estimated Outlays.....................        113        500        786        989      1,115      3,504
    Other National Science Foundation
     Activities:
        Authorization Level...................        520        615        659        687        720      3,200
        Estimated Outlays.....................        327        466        581        657        709      2,740
    Subtotal, National Science Foundation:
        Authorization Level...................      7,485      8,131      8,768      9,436     10,161     43,980
        Estimated Outlays.....................      1,524      4,724      6,746      7,993      8,972     29,958
Department of Energy:
    Office of Science:
        Authorization Level...................      5,247      5,614      6,007      6,428      6,878     30,174
        Estimated Outlays.....................      2,886      4,662      5,775      6,180      6,612     26,115
    Other Department of Energy Activities:
        Estimated Authorization Level.........        530        718        943      1,171      1,384      4,746
        Estimated Outlays.....................        292        554        814      1,035      1,254      3,948
    Subtotal, Department of Energy:
        Estimated Authorization Level.........      5,777      6,332      6,950      7,599      8,262     34,920
        Estimated Outlays.....................      3,177      5,216      6,589      7,214      7,866     30,062
National Institute of Standards and
 Technology:
    Scientific and Technical Research:
        Authorization Level...................        620        657        697        739        783      3,495
        Estimated Outlays.....................        477        636        687        728        772      3,300
    Industrial Technology Services:
        Authorization Level...................        246        250        261        264        276      1,297
        Estimated Outlays.....................         39        149        220        251        265        924
    Facility Construction and Maintenance:
        Authorization Level...................        125         85        122        124        133        589
        Estimated Outlays.....................         15         28         47         86        100        275
    Subtotal, National Institute of Standards
     and Technology:
        Authorization Level...................        991        992      1,080      1,126      1,192      5,382
        Estimated Outlays.....................        532        813        953      1,064      1,137      4,499
Economic Development Administration:
    Regional Innovation Cluster Program:
        Estimated Authorization Level.........        200        200        200        200        200      1,000
        Estimated Outlays.....................         10         54         98        154        194        510
    Loan Guarantee Program:
        Authorization Level...................         50         50         50         50         50        250
        Estimated Outlays.....................         10         40         47         50         50        197
    Subtotal, Economic Development Agency:
        Estimated Authorization Level.........        250        250        250        250        250      1,250
        Estimated Outlays.....................         20         94        145        204        244        707
Office of Science and Technology Policy:
        Estimated Authorization Level.........         10         10         10         10         10         50
        Estimated Outlays.....................          9         10         10         10         10         49
Total Changes:
        Estimated Authorization Level.........     14,513     15,716     17,058     18,412     19,875     85,582
        Estimated Outlays.....................      5,262     10,857     14,442     16,485     18,229     65,275
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Components May not sum to totals because of rounding.

    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes H.R. 5116 
will be enacted in 2010 and that the necessary amounts will be 
appropriated for each fiscal year. Estimated outlays are based 
on historical spending patterns for existing and similar 
programs.

National Science Foundation (NSF) Programs

    H.R. 5116 would authorize appropriations totaling nearly 
$44 billion over the 2011-2015 period for the National Science 
Foundation to carry out various activities to support basic 
scientific research and education.
    Research and Related Activities. The bill would authorize 
the appropriation of $35.2 billion over the 2011-2015 period 
for programs under NSF's research and related activities 
account. In 2010, those programs received an appropriation of 
$5.6 billion to support most of NSF's basic science, 
technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) research. Based 
on historical spending patterns, CBO estimates that this 
provision would cost $23.7 billion over the 2011-2015 period 
and $11.5 billion after 2015.
    Education and Human Resources. The legislation would 
authorize the appropriation of $5.5 billion over the 2011-2015 
period for NSF's education and human resources programs. In 
2010, those programs received an appropriation of $873 million 
to support and expand information regarding STEM and in the 
workforce in those fields. Based on historical spending 
patterns, CBO estimates that implementing this provision would 
cost $3.5 billion over the 2011-2015 period and about $2 
billion after 2015.
    Other NSF Activities. H.R. 5116 would authorize the 
appropriation of $3.2 billion over the 2011-2015 period for 
other NSF activities, including agency operations and award 
management ($1.9 billion), major research equipment and 
facilities construction ($1.2 billion), the Office of the 
Inspector General ($80 million), the Office of the National 
Science Board ($26 million), and a pilot program ($12 million) 
to award cash incentives for private entities to develop 
certain innovative technologies. In 2010, NSF received 
appropriations totaling $436 million for those activities. 
Based on historical spending patterns, CBO estimates that 
implementing those provisions would cost $2.7 billion over the 
2011-2015 period and about $500 million after 2015, assuming 
appropriation of the specified amounts.

Department of Energy (DOE) Programs

    CBO estimates that H.R. 5116 would authorize the 
appropriation of about $35 billion over the 2011-2015 period 
for the Department of Energy to carry out various activities to 
support scientific research and education.
    Office of Science. The bill would authorize the 
appropriation of $30.2 billion over the 2011-2015 period for 
DOE research programs in basic energy sciences, biological and 
environmental sciences, and computational science. In addition, 
those funds would be used by DOE to mange 10 national 
laboratories and to support certain education initiatives. In 
2010, DOE received appropriations totaling $4.9 billion to 
carry out those activities. Assuming appropriation of the 
specified amounts, CBO estimates that implementing this 
provision would cost $26.1 billion over the 2011-2015 period 
and $4.1 billion after 2015.
    Other DOE Activities. The legislation would authorize 
appropriations totaling $4.3 billion over the 2011-2015 period 
for the Advanced Research Project Agency-Energy ($3.2 billion), 
which funds the research and development of projects with 
potential energy and environmental applications; the energy 
innovation hub program ($860 million), which would fund 
research teams working to develop innovative technologies with 
practical industry applications; and the energy applied science 
talent expansion program ($176 million), Which would provide 
grants to higher education institutions to enhance STEM 
education. Assuming appropriation of the specified amounts, CBO 
estimate that implementing those provisions would cost almost 
$3.6 billion over the 2011-2015 period and about $750 million 
after 2015.
    H.R. 5116 also would authorize the appropriation of such 
sums as are necessary to reauthorize and expand certain STEM 
educational programs, which would support students, teachers, 
and researchers at secondary and post-secondary institutions 
and to establish the cooperative research and development fund, 
which would cover the federal share of research and development 
agreements between the federal government and nonfederal 
entities. Based on information from DOE and assuming 
appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO estimates that 
implementing those programs would cost $481 million over the 
2011-2015 period and $80 million after 2015.

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Programs

    H.R. 5116 would authorize the appropriation of almost $5.4 
billion over the 2011-2015 period for programs administered by 
the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
    Scientific and Technical Research. The bill would authorize 
the appropriation of about $3.5 billion over the 2011-2015 
period for NIST's Scientific and Technical Research Services 
program. The program supports NIST's laboratories and technical 
programs as well as national research facilities, including the 
Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology. Assuming 
appropriation of the specified amounts, CBO estimates that 
implementing this provision would cost $3.3 billion over the 
2011-2015 period and about $200 million after 2015.
    Industrial Technology Services. The legislation would 
authorize the appropriation of $1.3 billion over the 2011-2015 
period to operate programs under the industrial technology 
services account. Those amounts would be used primarily to fund 
two programs, the manufacturing extension partnership ($800 
million), which provides technical assistance and training to 
small manufacturers, and the Technology Innovation Program 
($400 million), which provides grants to small- and medium-
sized businesses to support research and development on 
emerging technologies. Additional amounts would be authorized 
for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards Program ($50 
million). Assuming appropriation of the specified amounts, CBO 
estimates that implementing this provision would cost $924 
million over the 2011-2015 period and $373 million after 2015.
    Facility Construction and Maintenance. H.R. 5116 would 
authorize the appropriation of $589 million over the 2011-2015 
period for construction and maintenance of NIST buildings and 
laboratories. Assuming appropriation of the specified amounts, 
CBO estimates that implementing this provision would cost $275 
million over the 2011-2015 period and $314 million after 2015.

Economic Development Administration (EDA) Programs

    H.R. 5116 would authorize appropriations totaling about 
$1.3 billion over the 2011-2015 period for two Economic 
Development Administration programs to support the development 
of innovative technologies to aid small- and medium-sized 
businesses.
    Regional Innovation Cluster Program. The bill would 
authorize the appropriation of whatever amounts are necessary 
to support regional innovation clusters (geographically related 
groups of businesses focused on developing technologies for a 
particular industry sector). Under the bill, EDA would provide 
technical assistance and competitive grants to support the 
development of regional innovation clusters. The bill also 
would require EDA to contract with the National Academy of 
Sciences (NAS) to evaluate the effectiveness of the program. 
Based on information from EDA and NAS, CBO estimates that 
implementing this provision would cost $510 million over the 
2011-2015 period and $490 million after 2015.
    Loan Guarantee Program. The legislation would establish an 
EDA program to provide loan guarantees to small- and medium-
sized businesses to support the development of innovative 
manufacturing technologies. Under the Federal Credit Reform 
Act, the budgetary impact of the program would be measured in 
terms of the projected subsidy cost to provide such guarantees. 
(The subsidy cost is the estimated long-term cost--the value of 
defaults less recoveries--to the government of the loan 
guarantee calculated on a net-present-value basis, excluding 
administrative costs.) The bill would authorize $50 million a 
year over the 2011-2015 period for the subsidy cost of 
providing loan guarantees under the program. CBO estimates that 
the program would cost about $200 million over the 2011-2015 
period. Based on information from Standard and Poor's regarding 
the cumulative default and recovery rates for bonds with 
similar risk profiles, CBO estimates that the subsidy rate for 
the program would be between 15 percent and 20 percent. 
Therefore, we estimate that the program would allow EDA to 
guarantee roughly $300 mullion in loans each year over the 
2011-2015 period.
    The legislation also would authorize EDA to convert those 
loan guarantees into direct loans if borrowers were in risk of 
imminent default. The Congress would have to appropriate 
additional funds to cover the subsidy cost of any such direct 
loans prior to those loans being disbursed. CBO expects that 
the Secretary would use this authority infrequently and that 
any direct loan made under this authority would have a very 
high subsidy rate. Furthermore, CBO expects that it would be 
infeasible for the Congress to appropriate the necessary funds 
to convert a loan guarantee in imminent danger of default to a 
direct federal loan once the Secretary has chosen to exercise 
that authority. Therefore, we estimate that this provision 
would have no significant cost.

Office of Science and Technology Policy

    Under H.R. 5116, the Office of Science and Technology 
Policy would be required to submit additional reports to the 
Congress and prepare planning documents regarding 
nanotechnology and networking and research on information 
technology. Based on information from that office, the 
coordinating agencies, and the member agencies, as well as the 
cost of similar provisions, CBO estimates that implementing 
those provisions would cost about $50 million over the 2011-
2015 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts.
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go 
Act of 2010 establishes budget reporting and enforcement 
procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or 
revenues. H.R. 5116 would allow EDA to collect fees to cover 
administrative costs related to a loan guarantee program to 
provide loans to small- and medium-sized businesses to support 
the development of innovative manufacturing technologies. The 
collection of those fees would increase revenues and associated 
direct spending; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would 
apply. However CBO estimates that any increase in revenues from 
fees would be offset by similar increases in direct spending 
for administrative expenses. The net budgetary changes that are 
subject to pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in the following 
table.

  CBO Estimate of Pay-As-You-Go Effects for H.R. 5116, the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010, as ordered reported by the House Committee on
                                                        Science and Technology on April 28, 2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                           -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             2010    2011    2012    2013    2014    2015    2016    2017    2018    2019    2020   2010-2015  2010-2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       NET INCREASE OR DECREASE (-) IN THE DEFICIT

Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Impact............       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0         0          0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 5116 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA. Public colleges, universities, and research 
centers could benefit from grants authorized by the bill.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Jeff LaFave (NSF, DOE, 
NIST, EDA programs) Matthew Pickford (Office of Science and 
Technology Policy programs); Impact on State, Local, and Tribal 
Governments: Ryan Miller; Impact on the Private Sector: Amy 
Petz.
    Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                  XI. Compliance with Public Law 104-4

    H.R. 5116 contains no unfunded mandates.

         XII. Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations

    The oversight findings and recommendations of the Committee 
on Science and Technology are reflected in the body of this 
report.

      XIII. Statement on General Performance Goals and Objectives

    Pursuant to clause 3(c) of House Rule XIII, the goal of 
H.R. 5116 is to reauthorize the National Science Foundation, 
National Institute of Standards and Technology, the Office of 
Science at the Department of Energy, and the Advanced Research 
Projects Agency--Energy. H.R. 5116 also authorizes new programs 
at the Department of Energy and the Department of Commerce that 
also promote innovation and improve the competitiveness of the 
United States.

                XIV. Constitutional Authority Statement

    Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United 
States grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 5116.

                XV. Federal Advisory Committee Statement

    The functions of the advisory committees authorized in H.R. 
5116 are not currently being nor could they be performed by one 
or more agencies or by enlarging the mandate of another 
existing advisory committee.

                 XVI. Congressional Accountability Act

    The Committee finds that H.R. 5116 does not relate to the 
terms and conditions of employment or access to public services 
or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of 
the Congressional Accountability Act (Public Law 104-1).

                      XVII. Earmark Identification

    H.R. 5116 does not contain any congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 
clause 9 of Rule XXI.

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

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

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change 
is proposed is shown in roman):

21ST CENTURY NANOTECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ACT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 2. NATIONAL NANOTECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.

  (a) * * *
  (b) Program Activities.--The activities of the Program shall 
include--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(5) ensuring United States global leadership in the 
        development and application of nanotechnology;]
          (5) ensuring United States global leadership in the 
        development and application of nanotechnology, 
        including through coordination and leveraging Federal 
        investments with nanotechnology research, development, 
        and technology transition initiatives supported by the 
        States;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Program Management.--The National Science and Technology 
Council shall oversee the planning, management, and 
coordination of the Program. The Council, itself or through an 
appropriate subgroup it designates or establishes, shall--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(4) develop, within 12 months after the date of 
        enactment of this Act, and update every 3 years 
        thereafter, a strategic plan to guide the activities 
        described under subsection (b), meet the goals, 
        priorities, and anticipated outcomes of the 
        participating agencies, and describe--
                  [(A) how the Program will move results out of 
                the laboratory and into application for the 
                benefit of society;
                  [(B) the Program's support for long-term 
                funding for interdisciplinary research and 
                development in nanotechnology; and
                  [(C) the allocation of funding for 
                interagency nanotechnology projects;]
          (4) develop, within 12 months after the date of 
        enactment of the National Nanotechnology Initiative 
        Amendments Act of 2010, and update every 3 years 
        thereafter, a strategic plan to guide the activities 
        described under subsection (b) that specifies near-term 
        and long-term objectives for the Program, the 
        anticipated time frame for achieving the near-term 
        objectives, and the metrics to be used for assessing 
        progress toward the objectives, and that describes--
                  (A) how the Program will move results out of 
                the laboratory and into applications for the 
                benefit of society, including through 
                cooperation and collaborations with 
                nanotechnology research, development, and 
                technology transition initiatives supported by 
                the States;
                  (B) how the Program will encourage and 
                support interdisciplinary research and 
                development in nanotechnology; and
                  (C) proposed research in areas of national 
                importance in accordance with the requirements 
                of section 105 of the National Nanotechnology 
                Initiative Amendments Act of 2010;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Annual Report.--The Council shall prepare an annual 
report, to be submitted to the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives 
Committee on Science, and other appropriate committees, at the 
time of the President's budget request to Congress, that 
includes--
          (1) the Program budget, for the previous fiscal year, 
        for each agency that participates in the Program, 
        including a breakout of spending for the development 
        and acquisition of research facilities and 
        instrumentation, for each program component area, and 
        for all activities pursuant to subsection (b)(10);
          [(1)] (2) the Program budget, for the current fiscal 
        year, for each agency that participates in the Program, 
        including a breakout of spending for the development 
        and acquisition of research facilities and 
        instrumentation, for each program component area, and 
        for all activities pursuant to subsection (b)(10);
          [(2)] (3) the proposed Program budget for the next 
        fiscal year, for each agency that participates in the 
        Program, including a breakout of spending for the 
        development and acquisition of research facilities and 
        instrumentation, for each program component area, and 
        for all activities pursuant to subsection (b)(10);
          [(3)] (4) an analysis of the progress made toward 
        achieving the goals and priorities established for the 
        Program;
          [(4)] (5) an analysis of the extent to which the 
        Program has incorporated the recommendations of the 
        Advisory Panel; and
          [(5)] (6) an assessment of how Federal agencies are 
        implementing the plan described in subsection (c)(7), 
        and a description of the amount of Small Business 
        Innovative Research and Small Business Technology 
        Transfer Research funds supporting the plan.
  (e) Standards Setting.--The agencies participating in the 
Program shall support the activities of committees involved in 
the development of standards for nanotechnology and may 
reimburse the travel costs of scientists and engineers who 
participate in activities of such committees.

SEC. 3. PROGRAM COORDINATION.

  (a) * * *
  [(b) Funding.--The National Nanotechnology Coordination 
Office shall be funded through interagency funding in 
accordance with section 631 of Public Law 108-7.]
  (b) Funding.--(1) The operation of the National 
Nanotechnology Coordination Office shall be supported by funds 
from each agency participating in the Program. The portion of 
such Office's total budget provided by each agency for each 
fiscal year shall be in the same proportion as the agency's 
share of the total budget for the Program for the previous 
fiscal year, as specified in the report required under section 
2(d)(1).
  (2) The annual report under section 2(d) shall include--
          (A) a description of the funding required by the 
        National Nanotechnology Coordination Office to perform 
        the functions specified under subsection (a) for the 
        next fiscal year by category of activity, including the 
        funding required to carry out the requirements of 
        section 2(b)(10)(D), subsection (d) of this section, 
        and section 5;
          (B) a description of the funding required by such 
        Office to perform the functions specified under 
        subsection (a) for the current fiscal year by category 
        of activity, including the funding required to carry 
        out the requirements of subsection (d); and
          (C) the amount of funding provided for such Office 
        for the current fiscal year by each agency 
        participating in the Program.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Public Information.--(1) The National Nanotechnology 
Coordination Office shall develop and maintain a database 
accessible by the public of projects funded under the 
Environmental, Health, and Safety, the Education and Societal 
Dimensions, and the Nanomanufacturing program component areas, 
or any successor program component areas, including a 
description of each project, its source of funding by agency, 
and its funding history. For the Environmental, Health, and 
Safety program component area, or any successor program 
component area, projects shall be grouped by major objective as 
defined by the research plan required under section 103(b) of 
the National Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of 2010. 
For the Education and Societal Dimensions program component 
area, or any successor program component area, the projects 
shall be grouped in subcategories of--
          (A) education in formal settings;
          (B) education in informal settings;
          (C) public outreach; and
          (D) ethical, legal, and other societal issues.
  (2) The National Nanotechnology Coordination Office shall 
develop, maintain, and publicize information on nanotechnology 
facilities supported under the Program, and may include 
information on nanotechnology facilities supported by the 
States, that are accessible for use by individuals from 
academic institutions and from industry. The information shall 
include at a minimum the terms and conditions for the use of 
each facility, a description of the capabilities of the 
instruments and equipment available for use at the facility, 
and a description of the technical support available to assist 
users of the facility.

SEC. 4. ADVISORY PANEL.

  (a) In General.--The President shall establish [or designate] 
a National Nanotechnology Advisory Panel as a distinct entity. 
The Advisory Panel shall form a subpanel with membership having 
specific qualifications tailored to enable it to carry out the 
requirements of subsection (c)(7).
  (b) Qualifications.--The Advisory Panel established [or 
designated] by the President under subsection (a) shall consist 
primarily of members from academic institutions and industry. 
Members of the Advisory Panel shall be qualified to provide 
advice and information on nanotechnology research, development, 
demonstrations, education, technology transfer, commercial 
application, or societal and ethical concerns. In selecting [or 
designating] an Advisory Panel, the President may also seek and 
give consideration to recommendations from the Congress, 
industry, the scientific community (including the National 
Academy of Sciences, scientific professional societies, and 
academia), the defense community, State and local governments, 
regional nanotechnology programs, and other appropriate 
organizations. At least one member of the Advisory Panel shall 
be an individual employed by and representing a minority-
serving institution.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 5. TRIENNIAL EXTERNAL REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL NANOTECHNOLOGY 
                    PROGRAM.

  [(a) In General.--The Director of the National Nanotechnology 
Coordination Office shall enter into an arrangement with the 
National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences 
to conduct a triennial evaluation of the Program, including--
          [(1) an evaluation of the technical accomplishments 
        of the Program, including a review of whether the 
        Program has achieved the goals under the metrics 
        established by the Council;
          [(2) a review of the Program's management and 
        coordination across agencies and disciplines;
          [(3) a review of the funding levels at each agency 
        for the Program's activities and the ability of each 
        agency to achieve the Program's stated goals with that 
        funding;
          [(4) an evaluation of the Program's success in 
        transferring technology to the private sector;
          [(5) an evaluation of whether the Program has been 
        successful in fostering interdisciplinary research and 
        development;
          [(6) an evaluation of the extent to which the Program 
        has adequately considered ethical, legal, 
        environmental, and other appropriate societal concerns;
          [(7) recommendations for new or revised Program 
        goals;
          [(8) recommendations for new research areas, 
        partnerships, coordination and management mechanisms, 
        or programs to be established to achieve the Program's 
        stated goals;
          [(9) recommendations on policy, program, and budget 
        changes with respect to nanotechnology research and 
        development activities;
          [(10) recommendations for improved metrics to 
        evaluate the success of the Program in accomplishing 
        its stated goals;
          [(11) a review of the performance of the National 
        Nanotechnology Coordination Office and its efforts to 
        promote access to and early application of the 
        technologies, innovations, and expertise derived from 
        Program activities to agency missions and systems 
        across the Federal Government and to United States 
        industry;
          [(12) an analysis of the relative position of the 
        United States compared to other nations with respect to 
        nanotechnology research and development, including the 
        identification of any critical research areas where the 
        United States should be the world leader to best 
        achieve the goals of the Program; and
          [(13) an analysis of the current impact of 
        nanotechnology on the United States economy and 
        recommendations for increasing its future impact.
  [(b) Study on Molecular Self-Assembly.--As part of the first 
triennial review conducted in accordance with subsection (a), 
the National Research Council shall conduct a one-time study to 
determine the technical feasibility of molecular self-assembly 
for the manufacture of materials and devices at the molecular 
scale.
  [(c) Study on the Responsible Development of 
Nanotechnology.--As part of the first triennial review 
conducted in accordance with subsection (a), the National 
Research Council shall conduct a one-time study to assess the 
need for standards, guidelines, or strategies for ensuring the 
responsible development of nanotechnology, including, but not 
limited to--
          [(1) self-replicating nanoscale machines or devices;
          [(2) the release of such machines in natural 
        environments;
          [(3) encryption;
          [(4) the development of defensive technologies;
          [(5) the use of nanotechnology in the enhancement of 
        human intelligence; and
          [(6) the use of nanotechnology in developing 
        artificial intelligence.
  [(d) Evaluation To Be Transmitted to Congress.--The Director 
of the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office shall 
transmit the results of any evaluation for which it made 
arrangements under subsection (a) to the Advisory Panel, the 
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and 
the House of Representatives Committee on Science upon receipt. 
The first such evaluation shall be transmitted no later than 
June 10, 2005, with subsequent evaluations transmitted to the 
Committees every 3 years thereafter.]

SEC. 5. TRIENNIAL EXTERNAL REVIEW OF THE NATIONAL NANOTECHNOLOGY 
                    PROGRAM.

  (a) In General.--The Director of the National Nanotechnology 
Coordination Office shall enter into an arrangement with the 
National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences 
to conduct a triennial review of the Program. The Director 
shall ensure that the arrangement with the National Research 
Council is concluded in order to allow sufficient time for the 
reporting requirements of subsection (b) to be satisfied. Each 
triennial review shall include an evaluation of the--
          (1) research priorities and technical content of the 
        Program, including whether the allocation of funding 
        among program component areas, as designated according 
        to section 2(c)(2), is appropriate;
          (2) effectiveness of the Program's management and 
        coordination across agencies and disciplines, including 
        an assessment of the effectiveness of the National 
        Nanotechnology Coordination Office;
          (3) Program's scientific and technological 
        accomplishments and its success in transferring 
        technology to the private sector; and
          (4) adequacy of the Program's activities addressing 
        ethical, legal, environmental, and other appropriate 
        societal concerns, including human health concerns.
  (b) Evaluation To be Transmitted to Congress.--The National 
Research Council shall document the results of each triennial 
review carried out in accordance with subsection (a) in a 
report that includes any recommendations for ways to improve 
the Program's management and coordination processes and for 
changes to the Program's objectives, funding priorities, and 
technical content. Each report shall be submitted to the 
Director of the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office, 
who shall transmit it to the Advisory Panel, the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, and the 
Committee on Science and Technology of the House of 
Representatives not later than September 30 of every third 
year, with the first report due September 30, 2010.
  (c) Funding.--Of the amounts provided in accordance with 
section 3(b)(1), the following amounts shall be available to 
carry out this section:
          (1) $500,000 for fiscal year 2010.
          (2) $500,000 for fiscal year 2011.
          (3) $500,000 for fiscal year 2012.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 10. DEFINITIONS.

  In this Act:
          (1) * * *
          [(2) Nanotechnology.--The term ``nanotechnology'' 
        means the science and technology that will enable one 
        to understand, measure, manipulate, and manufacture at 
        the atomic, molecular, and supramolecular levels, aimed 
        at creating materials, devices, and systems with 
        fundamentally new molecular organization, properties, 
        and functions.]
          (2) Nanotechnology.--The term ``nanotechnology'' 
        means the science and technology that will enable one 
        to understand, measure, manipulate, and manufacture at 
        the nanoscale, aimed at creating materials, devices, 
        and systems with fundamentally new properties or 
        functions.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (7) Nanoscale.--The term ``nanoscale'' means one or 
        more dimensions of between approximately 1 and 100 
        nanometers.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING ACT OF 1991

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 3. PURPOSES.

  The purposes of this Act are to help ensure the continued 
leadership of the United States in [high-performance computing] 
networking and information technology and its applications by--
          (1) expanding Federal support for research, 
        development, and application of [high-performance 
        computing] networking and information technology in 
        order to--
                  (A) expand the number of researchers, 
                educators, and students with training in [high-
                performance computing] networking and 
                information technology and access to [high-
                performance computing] networking and 
                information technology resources;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  (F) provide for the application of [high-
                performance computing] networking and 
                information technology to Grand Challenges;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (2) improving the interagency planning and 
        coordination of Federal research and development on 
        [high-performance computing and] networking and 
        information technology and maximizing the effectiveness 
        of the Federal Government's [high-performance computing 
        network] networking and information technology research 
        and development programs;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

  As used in this Act, the term--
          (1) ``cyber-physical systems'' means physical or 
        engineered systems whose networking and information 
        technology functions and physical elements are deeply 
        integrated and are actively connected to the physical 
        world through sensors, actuators, or other means to 
        perform monitoring and control functions;
          [(1)] (2) ``Director'' means the Director of the 
        Office of Science and Technology Policy;
          [(2)] (3) ``Grand Challenge'' means a fundamental 
        problem in science or engineering, with broad economic 
        and scientific impact, whose solution will require the 
        application of high-performance computing resources and 
        multidisciplinary teams of researchers;
          [(3)] (4) ``[high-performance computing] networking 
        and information technology'' means advanced computing, 
        communications, and information technologies, including 
        [supercomputer] high-end computing systems, high-
        capacity and high-speed networks, special purpose and 
        experimental systems, applications and systems 
        software, and the management of large data sets;
          [(4)] (5) ``Internet'' means the international 
        computer network of both Federal and non-Federal 
        interoperable data networks;
          [(5)] (6) ``Network'' means a computer [network 
        referred to as the National Research and Education 
        Network established under section 102;] network, 
        including advanced computer networks of Federal 
        agencies and departments;
          [(6)] (7) ``Program'' means the [National High-
        Performance Computing Program] networking and 
        information technology research and development program 
        described in section 101; and
          [(7)] (8) ``Program Component Areas'' means the major 
        subject areas under which related individual projects 
        and activities carried out under the Program are 
        grouped.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


   TITLE I--[HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING] NETWORKING AND INFORMATION 
                  TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

SEC. 101. NATIONAL [HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING] NETWORKING AND 
                    INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 
                    PROGRAM.

  (a) [National High-Performance Computing] Networking and 
Information Technology Research and Development Program.--(1) 
The President shall implement a [National High-Performance 
Computing Program] networking and information technology 
research and development program, which shall--
          (A) provide for long-term basic and applied research 
        on [high-performance computing, including networking] 
        networking and information technology;
          (B) provide for research and development on, and 
        demonstration of, technologies to advance the capacity 
        and capabilities of [high-performance] high-end 
        computing and networking systems, and related software;
          (C) provide for sustained access by the research 
        community throughout the United States to [high-
        performance] high-end computing and networking systems 
        that are among the most advanced in the world in terms 
        of performance in solving scientific and engineering 
        problems, including provision for technical support for 
        users of such systems;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (G) provide for the technical support of, and 
        research and development on, [high-performance] high-
        end computing systems and software required to address 
        Grand Challenges;
          (H) provide for educating and training additional 
        undergraduate and graduate students in software 
        engineering, computer science, computer and network 
        security, applied mathematics, library and information 
        science, and computational science; [and]
          (I) provide for improving the security of computing 
        and networking systems, including Federal systems, 
        including providing for research required to establish 
        security standards and practices for these systems[.];
          (J) provide for increased understanding of the 
        scientific principles of cyber-physical systems and 
        improve the methods available for the design, 
        development, and operation of cyber-physical systems 
        that are characterized by high reliability, safety, and 
        security; and
          (K) provide for research and development on human-
        computer interactions, visualization, and information 
        management.
  (2) The Director shall--
          (A) establish the goals and priorities for Federal 
        [high-performance computing] networking and information 
        technology research, [development, networking,] 
        development, and other activities;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (C) provide for interagency coordination of Federal 
        [high-performance computing] networking and information 
        technology research, [development, networking,] 
        development, and other activities undertaken pursuant 
        to the Program;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (E) encourage and monitor the efforts of the agencies 
        participating in the Program to allocate the level of 
        resources and management attention necessary to ensure 
        that the strategic plan under subsection (e) is 
        developed and executed effectively and that the 
        objectives of the Program are met;
          [(E)] (F) develop and maintain a research, 
        development, and deployment roadmap covering all States 
        and regions for the provision of [high-performance] 
        high-end computing and networking systems under 
        paragraph (1)(C); and
          [(F)] (G) consult with academic, State, industry, and 
        other appropriate groups conducting research on and 
        using [high-performance] high-end computing.
  (3) The annual report submitted under paragraph (2)(D) 
shall--
          (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (C) describe the levels of Federal funding for the 
        fiscal year during which such report [is submitted,] is 
        submitted, the levels for the previous fiscal year, and 
        the levels proposed for the fiscal year with respect to 
        which the budget submission applies, for [each Program 
        Component Area;] each Program Component Area and 
        research area supported in accordance with section 104;
          (D) describe the levels of Federal funding for each 
        agency and department participating in the Program, and 
        for [each Program Component Area,] each Program 
        Component Area and research area supported in 
        accordance with section 104, for the fiscal year during 
        which such report [is submitted,] is submitted, the 
        levels for the previous fiscal year, and the levels 
        proposed for the fiscal year with respect to which the 
        budget submission applies; [and]
          (E) include a description of how the objectives for 
        each Program Component Area, and the objectives for 
        activities that involve multiple Program Component 
        Areas, relate to the objectives of the Program 
        identified in the strategic plan required under 
        subsection (e);
          (F) include--
                  (i) a description of the funding required by 
                the National Coordination Office to perform the 
                functions specified under section 102(b) for 
                the next fiscal year by category of activity;
                  (ii) a description of the funding required by 
                such Office to perform the functions specified 
                under section 102(b) for the current fiscal 
                year by category of activity; and
                  (iii) the amount of funding provided for such 
                Office for the current fiscal year by each 
                agency participating in the Program; and
          [(E)] (G) include an analysis of the progress made 
        toward achieving the goals and priorities established 
        for the Program and the extent to which the Program 
        incorporates the recommendations of the advisory 
        committee established under subsection (b).
  (b) Advisory Committee.--(1) The President shall establish an 
advisory committee on [high-performance computing] networking 
and information technology, in which the co-chairs shall be 
members of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and 
Technology and with the remainder of the committee consisting 
of geographically dispersed non-Federal members, including 
representatives of the research, education, and library 
communities, network and related software providers, and 
industry representatives in the Program Component Areas, who 
are specially qualified to provide the Director with advice and 
information on [high-performance computing] networking and 
information technology. The recommendations of the advisory 
committee shall be considered in reviewing and revising the 
Program. The advisory committee shall provide the Director with 
an independent assessment of--
          (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Office of Management and Budget.--(1) Each Federal agency 
and department participating in the Program shall, as part of 
its annual request for appropriations to the Office of 
Management and Budget, submit a report to the Office of 
Management and Budget which--
          (A) identifies each element of its [high-performance 
        computing] networking and information technology 
        activities which contributes directly to the Program 
        Component Areas or benefits from the Program; and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Periodic Reviews.--The agencies identified in subsection 
(a)(3)(B) shall--
          (1) periodically assess the contents and funding 
        levels of the Program Component Areas and restructure 
        the Program when warranted, taking into consideration 
        any relevant recommendations of the advisory committee 
        established under subsection (b); and
          (2) ensure that the Program includes large-scale, 
        long-term, interdisciplinary research and development 
        activities, including activities described in section 
        104.
  (e) Strategic Plan.--
          (1) In general.--The agencies identified in 
        subsection (a)(3)(B), working through the National 
        Science and Technology Council and with the assistance 
        of the National Coordination Office established under 
        section 102, shall develop, within 12 months after the 
        date of enactment of the Networking and Information 
        Technology Research and Development Act of 2010, and 
        update every 3 years thereafter, a 5-year strategic 
        plan to guide the activities described under subsection 
        (a)(1).
          (2) Contents.--The strategic plan shall specify near-
        term and long-term objectives for the Program, the 
        anticipated time frame for achieving the near-term 
        objectives, the metrics to be used for assessing 
        progress toward the objectives, and how the Program 
        will--
                  (A) foster the transfer of research and 
                development results into new technologies and 
                applications for the benefit of society, 
                including through cooperation and 
                collaborations with networking and information 
                technology research, development, and 
                technology transition initiatives supported by 
                the States;
                  (B) encourage and support mechanisms for 
                interdisciplinary research and development in 
                networking and information technology, 
                including through collaborations across 
                agencies, across Program Component Areas, with 
                industry, with Federal laboratories (as defined 
                in section 4 of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology 
                Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3703)), and 
                with international organizations;
                  (C) address long-term challenges of national 
                importance for which solutions require large-
                scale, long-term, interdisciplinary research 
                and development;
                  (D) place emphasis on innovative and high-
                risk projects having the potential for 
                substantial societal returns on the research 
                investment;
                  (E) strengthen all levels of networking and 
                information technology education and training 
                programs to ensure an adequate, well-trained 
                workforce; and
                  (F) attract more women and underrepresented 
                minorities to pursue postsecondary degrees in 
                networking and information technology.
  (3) National research infrastructure.--The strategic plan 
developed in accordance with paragraph (1) shall be accompanied 
by milestones and roadmaps for establishing and maintaining the 
national research infrastructure required to support the 
Program, including the roadmap required by subsection 
(a)(2)(E).
  (4) Recommendations.--The entities involved in developing the 
strategic plan under paragraph (1) shall take into 
consideration the recommendations--
          (A) of the advisory committee established under 
        subsection (b); and
          (B) of the stakeholders whose input was solicited by 
        the National Coordination Office, as required under 
        section 102(b)(3).
  (5) Report to congress.--The Director of the National 
Coordination Office shall transmit the strategic plan required 
under paragraph (1) to the advisory committee, the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, and the 
Committee on Science and Technology of the House of 
Representatives.

[SEC. 102. NATIONAL RESEARCH AND EDUCATION NETWORK.

  [(a) Establishment.--As part of the Program, the National 
Science Foundation, the Department of Defense, the Department 
of Energy, the Department of Commerce, the National Aeronautics 
and Space Administration, and other agencies participating in 
the Program shall support the establishment of the National 
Research and Education Network, portions of which shall, to the 
extent technically feasible, be capable of transmitting data at 
one gigabit per second or greater by 1996. The Network shall 
provide for the linkage of research institutions and 
educational institutions, government, and industry in every 
State.
  [(b) Access.--Federal agencies and departments shall work 
with private network service providers, State and local 
agencies, libraries, educational institutions and 
organizations, and others, as appropriate, in order to ensure 
that the researchers, educators, and students have access, as 
appropriate, to the Network. The Network is to provide users 
with appropriate access to high-performance computing systems, 
electronic information resources, other research facilities, 
and libraries. The Network shall provide access, to the extent 
practicable, to electronic information resources maintained by 
libraries, research facilities, publishers, and affiliated 
organizations.
  [(c) Network Characteristics.--The Network shall--
          [(1) be developed and deployed with the computer, 
        telecommunications, and information industries;
          [(2) be designed, developed, and operated in 
        collaboration with potential users in government, 
        industry, and research institutions and educational 
        institutions;
          [(3) be designed, developed, and operated in a manner 
        which fosters and maintains competition and private 
        sector investment in high-speed data networking within 
        the telecommunications industry;
          [(4) be designed, developed, and operated in a manner 
        which promotes research and development leading to 
        development of commercial data communications and 
        telecommunications standards, whose development will 
        encourage the establishment of privately operated high-
        speed commercial networks;
          [(5) be designed and operated so as to ensure the 
        continued application of laws that provide network and 
        information resources security measures, including 
        those that protect copyright and other intellectual 
        property rights, and those that control access to data 
        bases and protect national security;
          [(6) have accounting mechanisms which allow users or 
        groups of users to be charged for their usage of 
        copyrighted materials available over the Network and, 
        where appropriate and technically feasible, for their 
        usage of the Network;
          [(7) ensure the interoperability of Federal and non-
        Federal computer networks, to the extent appropriate, 
        in a way that allows autonomy for each component 
        network;
          [(8) be developed by purchasing standard commercial 
        transmission and network services from vendors whenever 
        feasible, and by contracting for customized services 
        when not feasible, in order to minimize Federal 
        investment in network hardware;
          [(9) support research and development of networking 
        software and hardware; and
          [(10) serve as a test bed for further research and 
        development of high-capacity and high-speed computing 
        networks and demonstrate how advanced computers, high-
        capacity and high-speed computing networks, and data 
        bases can improve the national information 
        infrastructure.
  [(d) Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency 
Responsibility.--As part of the Program, the Department of 
Defense, through the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, 
shall support research and development of advanced fiber optics 
technology, switches, and protocols needed to develop the 
Network.
  [(e) Information Services.--The Director shall assist the 
President in coordinating the activities of appropriate 
agencies and departments to promote the development of 
information services that could be provided over the Network. 
These services may include the provision of directories of the 
users and services on computer networks, data bases of 
unclassified Federal scientific data, training of users of data 
bases and computer networks, access to commercial information 
services for users of the Network, and technology to support 
computer-based collaboration that allows researchers and 
educators around the Nation to share information and 
instrumentation.
  [(f) Use of Grant Funds.--All Federal agencies and 
departments are authorized to allow recipients of Federal 
research grants to use grant moneys to pay for computer 
networking expenses.
  [(g) Report to Congress.--Within one year after the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Director shall report to the 
Congress on--
          [(1) effective mechanisms for providing operating 
        funds for the maintenance and use of the Network, 
        including user fees, industry support, and continued 
        Federal investment;
          [(2) the future operation and evolution of the 
        Network;
          [(3) how commercial information service providers 
        could be charged for access to the Network, and how 
        Network users could be charged for such commercial 
        information services;
          [(4) the technological feasibility of allowing 
        commercial information service providers to use the 
        Network and other federally funded research networks;
          [(5) how to protect the copyrights of material 
        distributed over the Network; and
          [(6) appropriate policies to ensure the security of 
        resources available on the Network and to protect the 
        privacy of users of networks.]

SEC. 102. NATIONAL COORDINATION OFFICE.

  (a) Establishment.--The Director shall establish a National 
Coordination Office with a Director and full-time staff.
  (b) Functions.--The National Coordination Office shall--
          (1) provide technical and administrative support to--
                  (A) the agencies participating in planning 
                and implementing the Program, including such 
                support as needed in the development of the 
                strategic plan under section 101(e); and
                  (B) the advisory committee established under 
                section 101(b);
          (2) serve as the primary point of contact on Federal 
        networking and information technology activities for 
        government organizations, academia, industry, 
        professional societies, State computing and networking 
        technology programs, interested citizen groups, and 
        others to exchange technical and programmatic 
        information;
          (3) solicit input and recommendations from a wide 
        range of stakeholders during the development of each 
        strategic plan required under section 101(e) through 
        the convening of at least 1 workshop with invitees from 
        academia, industry, Federal laboratories, and other 
        relevant organizations and institutions;
          (4) conduct public outreach, including the 
        dissemination of findings and recommendations of the 
        advisory committee, as appropriate; and
          (5) promote access to and early application of the 
        technologies, innovations, and expertise derived from 
        Program activities to agency missions and systems 
        across the Federal Government and to United States 
        industry.
  (c) Source of Funding.--
          (1) In general.--The operation of the National 
        Coordination Office shall be supported by funds from 
        each agency participating in the Program.
          (2) Specifications.--The portion of the total budget 
        of such Office that is provided by each agency for each 
        fiscal year shall be in the same proportion as each 
        such agency's share of the total budget for the Program 
        for the previous fiscal year, as specified in the 
        report required under section 101(a)(3).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 104. LARGE-SCALE RESEARCH IN AREAS OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE.

  (a) In General.--The Program shall encourage agencies 
identified in section 101(a)(3)(B) to support large-scale, 
long-term, interdisciplinary research and development 
activities in networking and information technology directed 
toward application areas that have the potential for 
significant contributions to national economic competitiveness 
and for other significant societal benefits. Such activities, 
ranging from basic research to the demonstration of technical 
solutions, shall be designed to advance the development of 
research discoveries. The advisory committee established under 
section 101(b) shall make recommendations to the Program for 
candidate research and development areas for support under this 
section.
  (b) Characteristics.--
          (1) In general.--Research and development activities 
        under this section shall--
                  (A) include projects selected on the basis of 
                applications for support through a competitive, 
                merit-based process;
                  (B) involve collaborations among researchers 
                in institutions of higher education and 
                industry, and may involve nonprofit research 
                institutions and Federal laboratories, as 
                appropriate;
                  (C) when possible, leverage Federal 
                investments through collaboration with related 
                State initiatives; and
                  (D) include a plan for fostering the transfer 
                of research discoveries and the results of 
                technology demonstration activities, including 
                from institutions of higher education and 
                Federal laboratories, to industry for 
                commercial development.
          (2) Cost-sharing.--In selecting applications for 
        support, the agencies shall give special consideration 
        to projects that include cost sharing from non-Federal 
        sources.
          (3) Agency collaboration.--If 2 or more agencies 
        identified in section 101(a)(3)(B), or other 
        appropriate agencies, are working on large-scale 
        research and development activities in the same area of 
        national importance, then such agencies shall strive to 
        collaborate through joint solicitation and selection of 
        applications for support and subsequent funding of 
        projects.
          (4) Interdisciplinary research centers.--Research and 
        development activities under this section may be 
        supported through interdisciplinary research centers 
        that are organized to investigate basic research 
        questions and carry out technology demonstration 
        activities in areas described in subsection (a). 
        Research may be carried out through existing 
        interdisciplinary centers, including those authorized 
        under section 7024(b)(2) of the America COMPETES Act 
        (Public Law 110-69; 42 U.S.C. 1862o-10).

SEC. 105. UNIVERSITY/INDUSTRY TASK FORCE.

  (a) Establishment.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
enactment of the Networking and Information Technology Research 
and Development Act of 2010, the Director of the National 
Coordination Office established under section 102 shall convene 
a task force to explore mechanisms for carrying out 
collaborative research and development activities for cyber-
physical systems, including the related technologies required 
to enable these systems, through a consortium or other 
appropriate entity with participants from institutions of 
higher education, Federal laboratories, and industry.
  (b) Functions.--The task force shall--
          (1) develop options for a collaborative model and an 
        organizational structure for such entity under which 
        the joint research and development activities could be 
        planned, managed, and conducted effectively, including 
        mechanisms for the allocation of resources among the 
        participants in such entity for support of such 
        activities;
          (2) propose a process for developing a research and 
        development agenda for such entity, including 
        objectives and milestones;
          (3) define the roles and responsibilities for the 
        participants from institutions of higher education, 
        Federal laboratories, and industry in such entity;
          (4) propose guidelines for assigning intellectual 
        property rights and for the transfer of research 
        results to the private sector; and
          (5) make recommendations for how such entity could be 
        funded from Federal, State, and non-governmental 
        sources.
  (c) Composition.--In establishing the task force under 
subsection (a), the Director of the National Coordination 
Office shall appoint an equal number of individuals from 
institutions of higher education and from industry with 
knowledge and expertise in cyber-physical systems, of which 2 
may be selected from Federal laboratories.
  (d) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
enactment of the Networking and Information Technology Research 
and Development Act of 2010, the Director of the National 
Coordination Office shall transmit to the Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the 
Committee on Science and Technology of the House of 
Representatives a report describing the findings and 
recommendations of the task force.

                      TITLE II--AGENCY ACTIVITIES

SEC. 201. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION ACTIVITIES.

  (a) General Responsibilities.--As part of the Program 
described in title I--
          (1) the National Science Foundation shall provide 
        computing and networking infrastructure support for all 
        science and engineering disciplines, and support basic 
        research and human resource development in all aspects 
        of [high-performance computing and advanced high-speed 
        computer networking;] networking and information 
        research and development;
          (2) the National Science Foundation shall use its 
        existing programs, in collaboration with other 
        agencies, as appropriate, to improve the teaching and 
        learning of networking and information technology at 
        all levels of education and to increase participation 
        in networking and information technology fields, 
        including by women and underrepresented minorities;
          [(2)] (3) to the extent that colleges, universities, 
        and libraries cannot connect to the Network with the 
        assistance of the private sector, the National Science 
        Foundation shall have primary responsibility for 
        assisting colleges, universities, and libraries to 
        connect to the Network;
          [(3)] (4) the National Science Foundation shall serve 
        as the primary source of information on access to and 
        use of the Network; and
          [(4)] (5) the National Science Foundation shall 
        upgrade the National Science Foundation funded network, 
        assist regional networks to upgrade their capabilities, 
        and provide other Federal departments and agencies the 
        opportunity to connect to the National Science 
        Foundation funded network.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 202. NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION ACTIVITIES.

  (a) General Responsibilities.--As part of the Program 
described in title I, the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration shall conduct basic and applied research in 
[high-performance computing] networking and information 
technology, particularly in the field of computational science, 
with emphasis on aerospace sciences, earth and space sciences, 
and remote exploration and experimentation.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 203. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ACTIVITIES.

  (a) General Responsibilities.--As part of the Program 
described in title I, the Secretary of Energy shall--
          (1) conduct and support basic and applied research in 
        [high-performance computing and networking] networking 
        and information technology to support fundamental 
        research in science and engineering disciplines related 
        to energy applications; and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 204. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE ACTIVITIES.

  (a) General Responsibilities.--As part of the Program 
described in title I--
          (1) the National Institute of Standards and 
        Technology shall--
                  (A) conduct basic and applied measurement 
                research needed to support various [high-
                performance computing systems and networks] 
                networking and information technology systems 
                and capabilities;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  (C) be responsible for developing benchmark 
                tests and standards for [high-performance 
                computing] networking and information 
                technology systems and software; and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 205. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ACTIVITIES.

  (a) General Responsibilities.--As part of the Program 
described in title I, the Environmental Protection Agency shall 
conduct basic and applied research directed toward the 
advancement and dissemination of [computational] networking and 
information technology techniques and software tools which form 
the core of ecosystem, atmospheric chemistry, and atmospheric 
dynamics models.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 206. ROLE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

  (a) General Responsibilities.--As part of the Program 
described in title I, the Secretary of Education is authorized 
to conduct basic and applied research in [computational 
research] networking and information technology research with 
an emphasis on the coordination of activities with libraries, 
school facilities, and education research groups with respect 
to the advancement and dissemination of computational science 
and the development, evaluation and application of software 
capabilities.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 208. FOSTERING UNITED STATES COMPETITIVENESS IN [HIGH-PERFORMANCE 
                    COMPUTING] NETWORKING AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 
                    AND RELATED ACTIVITIES.

  (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
          (1) [High-performance computing and associated] 
        Networking and information technologies are critical to 
        the United States economy.
          (2) While the United States has led the development 
        of [high-performance computing] networking and 
        information technologies, United States industry is 
        facing increasing global competition.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (4) It is appropriate for Federal agencies and 
        departments to use the funds authorized for the Program 
        in a manner which most effectively fosters the 
        maintenance and development of United States leadership 
        in [high-performance computers and associated] 
        networking and information technologies in and for the 
        benefit of the United States.
          (5) It is appropriate for Federal agencies and 
        departments to use the funds authorized for the Program 
        in a manner, consistent with the Trade Agreements Act 
        of 1979 (19 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.), which most 
        effectively fosters reciprocal competitive procurement 
        treatment by foreign governments for United States 
        [high-performance computing and associated] networking 
        and information technology products and suppliers.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION ACT OF 1950

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                         NATIONAL SCIENCE BOARD

  Sec. 4. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (g) The Board may, with the concurrence of a majority of its 
members, permit the appointment of a staff consisting of [not 
more than 5] professional staff members, technical and 
professional personnel on leave of absence from academic, 
industrial, or research institutions for a limited term, and 
such operations and support staff members as may be necessary. 
Such staff shall be appointed by the Chairman and assigned at 
the direction of the Board. The professional members and 
limited term technical and professional personnel of such staff 
may be appointed without regard to the provisions of title 5, 
United States Code, governing appointments in the competitive 
service, and the provisions of chapter 51 of such title 
relating to classification, and shall be compensated at a rate 
not exceeding the maximum rate payable under section 5376 of 
such title, as may be necessary to provide for the performance 
of such duties as may be prescribed by the Board in connection 
with the exercise of its powers and functions under this Act. 
Section 14(a)(3) shall apply to each limited term appointment 
of technical and professional personnel under this subsection. 
Each appointment under this subsection shall be subject to the 
same security requirements as those required for personnel of 
the Foundation appointed under section 14(a).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (j)(1) The Board shall render to the President and the 
Congress no later than [January 15] May 31 of each even 
numbered year, a report on indicators of the state of science 
and engineering in the United States.
  (2) The Board shall render to the President and the Congress 
reports on specific, individual policy matters within the 
authority of the Foundation (or otherwise as requested by the 
appropriate Congressional committees of jurisdiction or the 
President) related to science and engineering and education in 
science and engineering, as the Board, the President, or the 
Congress determines the need for such reports.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                 SCHOLARSHIPS AND GRADUATE FELLOWSHIPS

  Sec. 10. (a) The Foundation is authorized to award 
scholarships and graduate fellowships for study and research in 
the sciences or in engineering at appropriate nonprofit 
American or nonprofit foreign institutions selected by the 
recipient of such aid, for stated periods of time. Persons 
shall be selected for such scholarships and fellowships from 
among citizens, nationals or lawfully admitted permanent 
resident aliens of the United States, and such selections shall 
be made solely on the basis of ability; but in any case in 
which two or more applicants for scholarships or fellowships, 
as the case may be, are deemed by the Foundation to be 
possessed of substantially equal ability, and there are not 
sufficient scholarships or fellowships, as the case may be, 
available to grant one to each of such applicants, the 
available scholarship or scholarships, fellowship or 
fellowships shall be awarded to the applicants in such manner 
as will tend to result in a wide distribution of scholarships 
and fellowships throughout the United States. Nothing contained 
in this Act shall prohibit the Foundation from refusing or 
revoking a scholarship or fellowship award, in whole or in 
part, in the case of any applicant or recipient, if the Board 
is of the opinion that such award is not in the best interests 
of the United States.
  (b) The Director shall establish for each year the amount to 
be awarded for scholarships and fellowships under this section 
for that year. Each such scholarship and fellowship shall 
include a cost of education allowance of $12,000, subject to 
any restrictions on the use of cost of education allowance as 
determined by the Director.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2002

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 10A. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION TEACHING FELLOWSHIPS AND MASTER 
                    TEACHING FELLOWSHIPS.

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (h) Matching Requirement.--
          (1) In general.--An eligible entity receiving a grant 
        under this section shall provide, from non-Federal 
        sources, an amount equal to [50] 30 percent of the 
        amount of the grant ([which may be provided in cash or 
        in-kind] which shall be provided in cash) to carry out 
        the activities supported by the grant.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 15. ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENTS.

  (a) Board Meetings.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(3) Compliance audit.--The Inspector General of the 
        Foundation shall conduct an audit every three years of 
        the compliance by the Board with the requirements 
        described in paragraph (2). The audit shall examine the 
        proposed and actual content of closed meetings and 
        determine whether the closure of the meetings was 
        consistent with section 552b of title 5, United States 
        Code.]
          [(4)] (3) Report.--Not later than [February 15] April 
        15 of every third year, the Inspector General of the 
        Foundation shall transmit to the Committee on Science 
        of the House of Representatives, the Committee on 
        Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, 
        and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
        Pensions of the Senate [the audit required under 
        paragraph (3) along with] any recommendations for 
        corrective actions that need to be taken to achieve 
        fuller compliance with the requirements described in 
        paragraph (2), and recommendations on how to ensure 
        public access to the Board's deliberations.
          [(5)] (4) Materials relating to closed portions of 
        meetings.--[To facilitate the audit required under 
        paragraph (3) of this subsection, the] The Office of 
        the National Science Board shall maintain the General 
        Counsel's certificate, the presiding officer's 
        statement, and a transcript or recording of any closed 
        meeting, for at least 3 years after such meeting.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 17. UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION REFORM.

  [(a) In General.--The Director shall award grants, on a 
competitive, merit-reviewed basis, to institutions of higher 
education to expand previously implemented reforms of 
undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, or technology 
education that have been demonstrated to have been successful 
in increasing the number and quality of students studying 
toward and completing associate's or baccalaureate degrees in 
science, mathematics, engineering, or technology.
  [(b) Uses of Funds.--Activities supported by grants under 
this section may include--
          [(1) expansion of successful reform efforts beyond a 
        single course or group of courses to achieve reform 
        within an entire academic unit;
          [(2) expansion of successful reform efforts beyond a 
        single academic unit to other science, mathematics, 
        engineering, or technology academic units within an 
        institution;
          [(3) creation of multidisciplinary courses or 
        programs that formalize collaborations for the purpose 
        of improved student instruction and research in 
        science, mathematics, engineering, and technology;
          [(4) expansion of undergraduate research 
        opportunities beyond a particular laboratory, course, 
        or academic unit to engage multiple academic units in 
        providing multidisciplinary research opportunities for 
        undergraduate students;
          [(5) expansion of innovative tutoring or mentoring 
        programs proven to enhance student recruitment or 
        persistence to degree completion in science, 
        mathematics, engineering, or technology;
          [(6) improvement of undergraduate science, 
        mathematics, engineering, and technology education for 
        nonmajors, including education majors; and
          [(7) implementation of technology-driven reform 
        efforts, including the installation of technology to 
        facilitate such reform, that directly impact 
        undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, or 
        technology instruction or research experiences.
  [(c) Selection Process.--
          [(1) Applications.--An institution of higher 
        education seeking a grant under this section shall 
        submit an application to the Director at such time, in 
        such manner, and containing such information as the 
        Director may require. The application shall include, at 
        a minimum--
                  [(A) a description of the proposed reform 
                effort;
                  [(B) a description of the previously 
                implemented reform effort that will serve as 
                the basis for the proposed reform effort and 
                evidence of success of that previous effort, 
                including data on student recruitment, 
                persistence to degree completion, and academic 
                achievement;
                  [(C) evidence of active participation in the 
                proposed project by individuals who were 
                central to the success of the previously 
                implemented reform effort; and
                  [(D) evidence of institutional support for, 
                and commitment to, the proposed reform effort, 
                including a description of existing or planned 
                institutional policies and practices regarding 
                faculty hiring, promotion, tenure, and teaching 
                assignment that reward faculty contributions to 
                undergraduate education equal to, or greater 
                than, scholarly scientific research.
          [(2) Review of applications.--In evaluating 
        applications submitted under paragraph (1), the 
        Director shall consider at a minimum--
                  [(A) the evidence of past success in 
                implementing undergraduate education reform and 
                the likelihood of success in undertaking the 
                proposed expanded effort;
                  [(B) the extent to which the faculty, staff, 
                and administrators of the institution are 
                committed to making the proposed institutional 
                reform a priority of the participating academic 
                unit;
                  [(C) the degree to which the proposed reform 
                will contribute to change in institutional 
                culture and policy such that a greater value is 
                placed on faculty engagement in undergraduate 
                education, as evidenced through promotion and 
                tenure policies; and
                  [(D) the likelihood that the institution will 
                sustain or expand the reform beyond the period 
                of the grant.
          [(3) Grant distribution.--The Director shall ensure, 
        to the extent practicable, that grants awarded under 
        this section are made to a variety of types of 
        institutions of higher education.]

SEC. 17. TRANSFORMING UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION IN STEM.

  (a) In General.--The Director shall award grants, on a 
competitive, merit-reviewed basis, to institutions of higher 
education (or to consortia thereof) to reform undergraduate 
STEM education for the purpose of increasing the number and 
quality of students studying toward and completing 
baccalaureate degrees in STEM and improving the STEM learning 
outcomes for all undergraduate students, including through--
          (1) development, implementation, and assessment of 
        innovative, research-based approaches to transforming 
        the teaching and learning of disciplinary or 
        interdisciplinary STEM at the undergraduate level; and
          (2) expansion of successful STEM reform efforts 
        beyond a single course or group of courses to achieve 
        reform within an entire academic unit, or expansion of 
        successful reform efforts beyond a single academic unit 
        to other STEM academic units within an institution or 
        to comparable academic units at other institutions.
  (b) Uses of Funds.--Activities supported by grants under this 
section may include--
          (1) creation of multidisciplinary or 
        interdisciplinary courses or programs that formalize 
        collaborations for the purpose of improved student 
        instruction and research in STEM;
          (2) expansion of undergraduate STEM research 
        opportunities to include interdisciplinary research 
        opportunities and research opportunities in industry, 
        at Federal labs, and at international research 
        institutions or research sites;
          (3) implementation or expansion of bridge programs, 
        including programs that address student transition from 
        2-year to 4-year institutions, and cohort, tutoring, or 
        mentoring programs proven to enhance student 
        recruitment or persistence to degree completion in 
        STEM, including recruitment or persistence to degree 
        completion of individuals identified in section 33 or 
        34 of the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities 
        Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 1885b);
          (4) improvement of undergraduate STEM education for 
        nonmajors, including education majors;
          (5) implementation of evidence-based, technology-
        driven reform efforts that directly impact 
        undergraduate STEM instruction or research experiences;
          (6) development and implementation of faculty and 
        graduate teaching assistant development programs 
        focused on improved instruction, mentoring, assessment 
        of student learning, and support of undergraduate STEM 
        students;
          (7) support for graduate students and postdoctoral 
        fellows to participate in instructional or assessment 
        activities at primarily undergraduate institutions;
          (8) research on teaching and learning of STEM at the 
        undergraduate level related to the proposed reform 
        effort, including assessment and evaluation of the 
        proposed reform activities, research on scalability and 
        sustainability of approaches to reform, and development 
        and implementation of longitudinal studies of students 
        included in the proposed reform effort; and
          (9) support for initiatives that advance the 
        integration of global challenges such as sustainability 
        into disciplinary and interdisciplinary STEM education.
  (c) Partnership.--An institution of higher education may 
partner with one or more other nonprofit education or research 
organizations, including scientific and engineering societies, 
for the purposes of carrying out the activities authorized 
under this section.
  (d) Selection Process.--
          (1) Applications.--An institution of higher education 
        seeking a grant under this section shall submit an 
        application to the Director at such time, in such 
        manner, and containing such information as the Director 
        may require. The application shall include, at a 
        minimum--
                  (A) a description of the proposed reform 
                effort;
                  (B) a description of the research findings 
                that will serve as the basis for the proposed 
                reform effort or, in the case of applications 
                that propose an expansion of a previously 
                implemented reform effort, a description of the 
                previously implemented reform effort, including 
                indicators of success such as data on student 
                recruitment, persistence to degree completion, 
                and academic achievement;
                  (C) evidence of institutional support for, 
                and commitment to, the proposed reform effort, 
                including long-term commitment to implement 
                successful strategies from the current reform 
                effort beyond the academic unit or units 
                included in the grant proposal or to 
                disseminate successful strategies to other 
                institutions;
                  (D) a description of existing or planned 
                institutional policies and practices regarding 
                faculty hiring, promotion, tenure, and teaching 
                assignment that reward faculty contributions to 
                undergraduate STEM education; and
                  (E) a description of the plans for assessment 
                and evaluation of the proposed reform 
                activities, including evidence of participation 
                by individuals with experience in assessment 
                and evaluation of teaching and learning 
                programs.
          (2) Review of applications.--In selecting grant 
        recipients under this section, the Director shall 
        consider at a minimum--
                  (A) the likelihood of success in undertaking 
                the proposed effort at the institution 
                submitting the application, including the 
                extent to which the faculty, staff, and 
                administrators of the institution are committed 
                to making the proposed institutional reform a 
                priority of the participating academic unit or 
                units;
                  (B) the degree to which the proposed reform 
                will contribute to change in institutional 
                culture and policy such that a greater value is 
                placed on faculty engagement in undergraduate 
                education;
                  (C) the likelihood that the institution will 
                sustain or expand the reform beyond the period 
                of the grant; and
                  (D) the degree to which scholarly assessment 
                and evaluation plans are included in the design 
                of the reform effort, including the degree to 
                which such assessment and evaluation contribute 
                to the systematic accumulation of knowledge on 
                STEM education.
          (3) Priority.--For proposals that include an 
        expansion of existing reform efforts beyond a single 
        academic unit, the Director shall give priority to 
        proposals for which a senior institutional 
        administrator, including a dean or other administrator 
        of equal or higher rank, serves as the principal 
        investigator or a coprincipal investigator.
          (4) Grant distribution.--The Director shall ensure, 
        to the extent practicable, that grants awarded under 
        this section are made to a variety of types of 
        institutions of higher education.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


                          AMERICA COMPETES ACT

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``America COMPETES Act'' or the 
``America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote 
Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science Act''.

SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

  The table of contents of this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title.
     * * * * * * *

                      TITLE V--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

     * * * * * * *
[Sec. 5004. Nuclear science talent expansion program for institutions of 
          higher education.
[Sec. 5005. Hydrocarbon systems science talent expansion program for 
          institutions of higher education.]
Sec. 5004. Energy applied science talent expansion program for 
          institutions of higher education.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE V--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 5002. DEFINITIONS.

  In this title:
          (1) * * *
          (2) Energy systems science and engineering.--The term 
        ``energy systems science and engineering'' means--
                  (A) nuclear science and engineering, 
                including--
                          (i) nuclear engineering;
                          (ii) nuclear chemistry;
                          (iii) radiochemistry; and
                          (iv) health physics;
                  (B) hydrocarbon system science and 
                engineering, including--
                          (i) petroleum or reservoir 
                        engineering;
                          (ii) environmental geoscience;
                          (iii) petrophysics;
                          (iv) geophysics;
                          (v) geochemistry;
                          (vi) petroleum geology;
                          (vii) ocean engineering;
                          (viii) environmental engineering; and
                          (ix) carbon capture and sequestration 
                        science and engineering;
                  (C) energy efficiency and renewable energy 
                technology systems science and engineering, 
                including with respect to--
                          (i) solar technology systems;
                          (ii) wind technology systems;
                          (iii) buildings technology systems;
                          (iv) transportation technology 
                        systems;
                          (v) hydropower systems; and
                          (vi) geothermal systems; and
                  (D) energy storage and distribution systems 
                science and engineering, including with respect 
                to--
                          (i) energy storage; and
                          (ii) energy delivery.
          [(2)] (3) Institution of higher education.--The term 
        ``institution of higher education'' has the meaning 
        given the term in section 101(a) of the Higher 
        Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)).
          [(3)] (4) National laboratory.--The term ``National 
        Laboratory'' has the meaning given the term in section 
        2 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15801).
          [(4)] (5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means 
        the Secretary of Energy.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 5004. NUCLEAR SCIENCE TALENT EXPANSION PROGRAM FOR INSTITUTIONS 
                    OF HIGHER EDUCATION.

  [(a) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
          [(1) to address the decline in the number of and 
        resources available to nuclear science programs at 
        institutions of higher education; and
          [(2) to increase the number of graduates with degrees 
        in nuclear science, an area of strategic importance to 
        the economic competitiveness and energy security of the 
        United States.
  [(b) Definition of Nuclear Science.--In this section, the 
term ``nuclear science'' includes--
          [(1) nuclear science;
          [(2) nuclear engineering;
          [(3) nuclear chemistry;
          [(4) radio chemistry; and
          [(5) health physics.
  [(c) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish, in 
accordance with this section, a program to expand and enhance 
institution of higher education nuclear science educational 
capabilities.
  [(d) Nuclear Science Program Expansion Grants for 
Institutions of Higher Education.--
          [(1) In general.--The Secretary shall award up to 3 
        competitive grants for each fiscal year to institutions 
        of higher education that establish new academic degree 
        programs in nuclear science.
          [(2) Priority.--In evaluating grants under this 
        subsection, the Secretary shall give priority to 
        proposals that involve partnerships with a National 
        Laboratory or other eligible nuclear-related entity, as 
        determined by the Secretary.
          [(3) Criteria.--Criteria for a grant awarded under 
        this subsection shall be based on--
                  [(A) the potential to attract new students to 
                the program;
                  [(B) academic rigor; and
                  [(C) the ability to offer hands-on learning 
                opportunities.
          [(4) Duration and amount.--
                  [(A) Duration.--A grant under this subsection 
                may be up to 5 years in duration.
                  [(B) Amount.--An institution of higher 
                education that receives a grant under this 
                subsection shall be eligible for up to 
                $1,000,000 for each year of the grant period.
          [(5) Use of funds.--An institution of higher 
        education that receives a grant under this subsection 
        may use the grant to--
                  [(A) recruit and retain new faculty;
                  [(B) develop core and specialized course 
                content;
                  [(C) encourage collaboration between faculty 
                and researchers in the nuclear science field; 
                and
                  [(D) support outreach efforts to recruit 
                students.
  [(e) Nuclear Science Competitiveness Grants for Institutions 
of Higher Education.--
          [(1) In general.--The Secretary shall award up to 5 
        competitive grants for each fiscal year to institutions 
        of higher education with existing academic degree 
        programs that produce graduates in nuclear science.
          [(2) Criteria.--Criteria for a grant awarded under 
        this subsection shall be based on the potential for 
        increasing the number and academic quality of graduates 
        in the nuclear sciences who enter into careers in 
        nuclear-related fields.
          [(3) Duration and amount.--
                  [(A) Duration.--A grant under this subsection 
                may be up to 5 years in duration.
                  [(B) Amount.--An institution of higher 
                education that receives a grant under this 
                subsection shall be eligible for up to $500,000 
                for each year of the grant period.
          [(4) Use of funds.--An institution of higher 
        education that receives a grant under this subsection 
        may use the grant to--
                  [(A) increase the number of graduates in 
                nuclear science that enter into careers in the 
                nuclear science field;
                  [(B) enhance the teaching of advanced nuclear 
                technologies;
                  [(C) aggressively pursue collaboration 
                opportunities with industry and National 
                Laboratories;
                  [(D) bolster or sustain nuclear 
                infrastructure and research facilities of the 
                institution of higher education, such as 
                research and training reactors or laboratories; 
                and
                  [(E) provide tuition assistance and stipends 
                to undergraduate and graduate students.
  [(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--
          [(1) Nuclear science program expansion grants for 
        institutions of higher education.--There are authorized 
        to be appropriated to carry out subsection (d)--
                  [(A) $3,500,000 for fiscal year 2008;
                  [(B) $6,500,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
                  [(C) $9,500,000 for fiscal year 2010.
          [(2) Nuclear science competitiveness grants for 
        institutions of higher education.--There are authorized 
        to be appropriated to carry out subsection (e)--
                  [(A) $3,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
                  [(B) $5,500,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
                  [(C) $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.

[SEC. 5005. HYDROCARBON SYSTEMS SCIENCE TALENT EXPANSION PROGRAM FOR 
                    INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION.

  [(a) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
          [(1) to address the decline in the number of and 
        resources available to hydrocarbon systems science 
        programs at institutions of higher education; and
          [(2) to increase the number of graduates with degrees 
        in hydrocarbon systems science, an area of strategic 
        importance to the economic competitiveness and energy 
        security of the United States.
  [(b) Definition of Hydrocarbon Systems Science.--In this 
section:
          [(1) In general.--The term ``hydrocarbon systems 
        science'' means a science involving natural gas or 
        other petroleum exploration, development, or 
        production.
          [(2) Inclusions.--The term ``hydrocarbon systems 
        science'' includes--
                  [(A) petroleum or reservoir engineering;
                  [(B) environmental geoscience;
                  [(C) petrophysics;
                  [(D) geophysics;
                  [(E) geochemistry;
                  [(F) petroleum geology;
                  [(G) ocean engineering;
                  [(H) environmental engineering; and
                  [(I) computer science, as computer science 
                relates to a science described in this 
                subsection.
  [(c) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish, in 
accordance with this section, a program to expand and enhance 
institution of higher education hydrocarbon systems science 
educational capabilities.
  [(d) Hydrocarbon Systems Science Program Expansion Grants for 
Institutions of Higher Education.--
          [(1) In general.--The Secretary shall award up to 3 
        competitive grants for each fiscal year to institutions 
        of higher education that establish new academic degree 
        programs in hydrocarbon systems science.
          [(2) Eligibility.--In evaluating grants under this 
        subsection, the Secretary shall give priority to 
        proposals that involve partnerships with the National 
        Laboratories, including the National Energy Technology 
        Laboratory, or other hydrocarbon systems scientific 
        entities, as determined by the Secretary.
          [(3) Criteria.--Criteria for a grant awarded under 
        this subsection shall be based on--
                  [(A) the potential to attract new students to 
                the program;
                  [(B) academic rigor; and
                  [(C) the ability to offer hands-on learning 
                opportunities.
          [(4) Duration and amount.--
                  [(A) Duration.--A grant under this subsection 
                may be up to 5 years in duration.
                  [(B) Amount.--An institution of higher 
                education that receives a grant under this 
                subsection shall be eligible for up to 
                $1,000,000 for each year of the grant period.
          [(5) Use of funds.--An institution of higher 
        education that receives a grant under this subsection 
        may use the grant to--
                  [(A) recruit and retain new faculty;
                  [(B) develop core and specialized course 
                content;
                  [(C) encourage collaboration between faculty 
                and researchers in the hydrocarbon systems 
                science field; and
                  [(D) support outreach efforts to recruit 
                students.
  [(e) Hydrocarbon Systems Science Competitiveness Grants for 
Institutions of Higher Education.--
          [(1) In general.--The Secretary shall award up to 5 
        competitive grants for each fiscal year to institutions 
        of higher education with existing academic degree 
        programs that produce graduates in hydrocarbon systems 
        science.
          [(2) Criteria.--Criteria for a grant awarded under 
        this subsection shall be based on the potential for 
        increasing the number and academic quality of graduates 
        in hydrocarbon systems sciences who enter into careers 
        in natural gas and other petroleum exploration, 
        development, and production related fields.
          [(3) Duration and amount.--
                  [(A) Duration.--A grant under this subsection 
                may be up to 5 years in duration.
                  [(B) Amount.--An institution of higher 
                education that receives a grant under this 
                subsection shall be eligible for up to $500,000 
                for each year of the grant period.
          [(4) Use of funds.--An institution of higher 
        education that receives a grant under this subsection 
        may use the grant to--
                  [(A) increase the number of graduates in the 
                hydrocarbon systems sciences that enter into 
                careers in the natural gas and other petroleum 
                exploration, development, and production 
                science fields;
                  [(B) enhance the teaching of advanced natural 
                gas and other petroleum exploration, 
                development, and production technologies;
                  [(C) aggressively pursue collaboration 
                opportunities with industry and the National 
                Laboratories, including the National Energy 
                Technology Laboratory;
                  [(D) bolster or sustain natural gas and other 
                petroleum exploration, development, and 
                production infrastructure and research 
                facilities of the institution of higher 
                education, such as research and training or 
                laboratories; and
                  [(E) provide tuition assistance and stipends 
                to undergraduate and graduate students.
  [(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--
          [(1) Hydrocarbon systems science program expansion 
        grants for institutions of higher education.--There are 
        authorized to be appropriated to carry out subsection 
        (d)--
                  [(A) $3,500,000 for fiscal year 2008;
                  [(B) $6,500,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
                  [(C) $9,500,000 for fiscal year 2010.
          [(2) Hydrocarbon systems science competitiveness 
        grants for institutions of higher education.--There are 
        authorized to be appropriated to carry out subsection 
        (e)--
                  [(A) $3,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
                  [(B) $5,500,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
                  [(C) $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.]

SEC. 5004. ENERGY APPLIED SCIENCE TALENT EXPANSION PROGRAM FOR 
                    INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION.

  (a) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
          (1) to address the decline in the number of and 
        resources available to energy systems science and 
        engineering programs at institutions of higher 
        education, including community colleges; and
          (2) to increase the number of graduates with degrees 
        in energy systems science and engineering, an area of 
        strategic importance to the economic competitiveness 
        and energy security of the United States.
  (b) Establishment.--The Secretary shall award grants, on a 
competitive, merit-reviewed basis, to institutions of higher 
education to implement or expand the energy systems science and 
engineering educational and technical training capabilities of 
the institution, and to provide merit-based financial support 
for master's and doctoral level students pursuing courses of 
study and research in energy systems sciences and engineering.
  (c) Use of Funds.--An institution of higher education that 
receives a grant under this section may use the grant to--
          (1) provide traineeships, including stipends and cost 
        of education allowances, to master's and doctoral 
        students;
          (2) develop or expand multidisciplinary or 
        interdisciplinary courses or programs;
          (3) recruit and retain new faculty;
          (4) develop or improve core and specialized course 
        content;
          (5) encourage interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary 
        research collaborations;
          (6) support outreach efforts to recruit students, 
        including individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of 
        the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 
        U.S.C. 1885a or 1885b); and
          (7) pursue opportunities for collaboration with 
        industry and National Laboratories.
  (d) Criteria.--Criteria for awarding a grant under this 
section shall be based on--
          (1) the potential to attract new students to the 
        program;
          (2) academic rigor; and
          (3) the ability to offer hands-on education and 
        training opportunities for graduate students in the 
        emerging areas of energy systems science and 
        engineering.
  (e) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority to proposals 
that involve active partnerships with a National Laboratory or 
other energy systems science and engineering related entity, as 
determined by the Secretary.
  (f) Duration and Amount.--
          (1) Duration.--A grant under this section may be for 
        up to 5 years in duration.
          (2) Amount.--An institution of higher education that 
        receives a grant under this section shall be eligible 
        for up to $1,000,000 for each year of the grant period.
  (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to 
be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section--
          (1) $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
          (2) $32,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
          (3) $36,000,000 for fiscal year 2013;
          (4) $38,000,000 for fiscal year 2014; and
          (5) $40,000,000 for fiscal year 2015.

SEC. 5006. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY EARLY CAREER AWARDS FOR SCIENCE. 
                    ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS RESEARCHERS.

  (a) Grant Awards.--The [Director of the Office of Science of 
the Department (referred to in this section as the 
``Director'') shall carry] Secretary shall carry out a program 
to award grants to scientists and engineers at an early career 
stage at institutions of higher education and organizations 
described in subsection (c) to conduct research in fields 
relevant to the mission of the Department.
  (b) Amount and Duration.--
          (1) Amount.--The amount of a grant awarded under this 
        section shall be--
                  (A) not less than $80,000 per year; and
                  (B) not more than [$125,000] $175,000 per 
                year.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Eligibility.--
          (1) In general.--To be eligible to receive a grant 
        under this section, an individual shall[, as determined 
        by the Director]--
                  (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (2) Waiver.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1)(A), the 
        [Director] Secretary may determine that an individual 
        who has completed a doctorate more than 10 years before 
        the date of submission of a proposal under subsection 
        (e)(1) is eligible to receive a grant under this 
        section if the individual was unable to conduct 
        research for a period of time because of extenuating 
        circumstances, including military service or family 
        responsibilities, as determined by the [Director] 
        Secretary.
  (d) Selection.--Grant recipients shall be selected on a 
competitive, [merit-reviewed] merit-based, peer reviewed basis.
  (e) Selection Process and Criteria.--
          (1) Proposal.--To be eligible to receive a grant 
        under this section, an individual shall submit to the 
        [Director] Secretary a proposal at such time, in such 
        manner, and containing such information as the 
        [Director] Secretary may require.
          (2) Evaluation.--In evaluating the proposals 
        submitted under paragraph (1), the [Director] Secretary 
        shall take into consideration, at a minimum--
                  (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) Diversity Requirement.--
          (1) In general.--In awarding grants under this 
        section, the [Director] Secretary shall endeavor to 
        ensure that the grant recipients represent a variety of 
        types of institutions of higher education and 
        nonprofit, nondegree-granting research organizations.
          (2) Requirement.--In support of the goal described in 
        paragraph (1), the [Director] Secretary shall broadly 
        disseminate information regarding the deadlines 
        applicable to, and manner in which to submit, proposals 
        for grants under this section, including by conducting 
        outreach activities for--
                  (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (g) Report on Recruiting and Retaining Early Career Science 
and Engineering Researchers at National Laboratories.--
          (1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the 
        date of enactment of this Act, the [Director] Secretary 
        shall submit to the Committee on Science and Technology 
        of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 
        Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report 
        describing efforts of the [Director] Secretary to 
        recruit and retain young scientists and engineers at 
        early career stages at the National Laboratories.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to 
be appropriated to the Secretary[, acting through the 
Director,] to carry out this section [$25,000,000 for each of 
fiscal years 2008 through 2010] such sums as are necessary.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 5009. PROTECTING AMERICA'S COMPETITIVE EDGE (PACE) GRADUATE 
                    FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM.

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Selection.--
          (1) In general.--The Secretary shall award 
        fellowships to eligible students under this section 
        through a competitive merit review process, [involving 
        written and oral interviews, that will result in a wide 
        distribution of awards throughout the United States,] 
        as determined by the Secretary.
          (2) Criteria.--The Secretary shall establish 
        selection criteria for awarding fellowships under this 
        section that require an eligible student--
                  (A) * * *
                  (B) to demonstrate to the Secretary--
                          (i) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                          (iv) excellent [verbal and] 
                        communication skills to explain, 
                        defend, and demonstrate an 
                        understanding of technical subjects 
                        relating to the fellowship; and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d) Awards.--
          (1) Amount.--A fellowship awarded under this section 
        shall--
                  (A) * * *
                  (B) cover--
                          (i) partial or full graduate tuition 
                        at an institution of higher education 
                        described in subsection (a); and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section--
          [(1) $7,500,000 for fiscal year 2008;
          [(2) $12,000,000 for fiscal year 2009, including 
        nonexpiring fellowships for the preceding fiscal year; 
        and
          [(3) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2010, including 
        nonexpiring fellowships for preceding fiscal years.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 5012. ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY--ENERGY.

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Goals.--
          (1) * * *
          (2) Means.--ARPA-E shall achieve the goals 
        established under paragraph (1) through energy 
        technology projects by--
                  (A) identifying and promoting revolutionary 
                advances in fundamental and applied sciences;
                  (B) translating scientific discoveries and 
                cutting-edge inventions into technological 
                innovations; [and]
                  (C) accelerating transformational 
                technological advances in areas that industry 
                by itself is not likely to undertake because of 
                technical and financial uncertainty[.]; and
                  (D) promoting the commercial application of 
                advanced energy technologies.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) Responsibilities.--The responsibilities of the Director 
shall include--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (3) administering the Fund through awards to 
        institutions of higher education, companies, research 
        foundations, trade and industry research 
        collaborations, or consortia of such entities, which 
        may include federally-funded research and development 
        centers, to achieve the goals described in subsection 
        (c) through targeted acceleration of--
                  (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  [(C) research and development of 
                manufacturing processes for novel energy 
                technologies; and]
                  (C) research and development of advanced 
                manufacturing process and technologies for the 
                domestic manufacturing of novel energy 
                technologies; and
                  (D) coordination with nongovernmental 
                entities for demonstration of technologies and 
                research applications to facilitate technology 
                transfer; [and]
          (4) terminating programs carried out under this 
        section that are not achieving the goals of the 
        programs[.]; and
          (5) pursuant to subsection (c)(2)(C)--
                  (A) ensuring that applications for funding 
                disclose the extent of current and prior 
                efforts, including monetary investments as 
                appropriate, in pursuit of the technology area 
                for which funding is being requested;
                  (B) adopting measures to ensure that, in 
                making awards, program managers adhere to the 
                objectives in subsection (c)(2)(C); and
                  (C) providing as part of the annual report 
                required by subsection (h)(1) a summary of the 
                instances of and reasons for ARPA-E funding 
                projects in technology areas already being 
                undertaken by industry.
  (f) Awards.--In carrying out this section, the Director shall 
initiate and execute awards in the form of grants, contracts, 
cooperative agreements, cash prizes, and other transactions.
  [(f)] (g) Personnel.--
          (1) In general.--The Director shall establish and 
        maintain within ARPA-E a staff with sufficient 
        qualifications and expertise to enable ARPA-E to carry 
        out its responsibilities under this section in 
        conjunction with the operations of the rest of the 
        Department.
          [(1)] (2) [Program managers] Program directors.--
                  (A) In general.--The Director shall designate 
                employees to serve as [program managers] 
                program directors for [each of] the programs 
                established pursuant to the responsibilities 
                established for ARPA-E under subsection (e).
                  (B) Responsibilities.--A [program manager] 
                program director of a program shall be 
                responsible for--
                          (i) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                          (iv) selecting on the basis of 
                        merit[, with advice under subsection 
                        (j) as appropriate,] each of the 
                        projects to be supported under the 
                        program after considering--
                                  (I) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                          (v) identifying innovative cost-
                        sharing arrangements for ARPA-E 
                        projects, including through use of the 
                        authority under section 988(b)(3) of 
                        the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 
                        U.S.C. 16352(b)(3)); identifying 
                        innovative cost-sharing arrangements 
                        for ARPA-E projects, including through 
                        use of the authority under section 
                        988(b)(3) of the Energy Policy Act of 
                        2005 (42 U.S.C. 16352(b)(3));
                          [(v)] (vi) monitoring the progress of 
                        projects supported under the program; 
                        [and]
                          (vii) identifying mechanisms for 
                        commercial application of successful 
                        energy technology development projects, 
                        including through establishment of 
                        partnerships between awardees and 
                        commercial entities; and
                          [(vi)] (viii) recommending program 
                        restructure or termination of research 
                        partnerships or whole projects.
                  (C) Term.--The term of a program manager 
                shall be up to 3 years and may be renewed.
          [(2)] (3) Hiring and management.--
                  (A) In general.--The Director shall have the 
                authority to--
                          (i) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                  [(B) Number.--The Director shall appoint not 
                less than 70, and not more than 120, personnel 
                under this section.]
                  [(C)] (B) Private recruiting firms.--The 
                Secretary, or the Director serving as an agent 
                of the Secretary, may contract with private 
                recruiting firms for the hiring of qualified 
                technical staff to carry out this section.
                  [(D)] (C) Additional staff.--The Director may 
                use all authorities in existence on the date of 
                enactment of this Act that are provided to the 
                Secretary to hire administrative, financial, 
                and clerical staff as necessary to carry out 
                this section.
          (4) Fellowships.--The Director is authorized to 
        select exceptional early-career and senior scientific, 
        legal, business, and technical personnel to serve as 
        fellows to work at ARPA-E for terms not to exceed two 
        years. Responsibilities of fellows may include--
                  (A) supporting program managers in program 
                creation, design, implementation, and 
                management;
                  (B) exploring technical fields for future 
                ARPA-E program areas;
                  (C) assisting the Director in the creation of 
                the strategic vision for ARPA-E referred to in 
                subsection (h)(2);
                  (D) preparing energy technology and economic 
                analyses; and
                  (E) any other appropriate responsibilities 
                identified by the Director.
  [(g)] (h) Reports and Roadmaps.--
          (1) * * *
          (2) Strategic vision roadmap.--Not later than October 
        1, [2008] 2010, and October 1, [2011] 2013, the 
        Director shall provide to the relevant authorizing and 
        appropriations committees of Congress a roadmap 
        describing the strategic vision that ARPA-E will use to 
        guide the choices of ARPA-E for future technology 
        investments over the following 3 fiscal years.
  [(h)] (i) Coordination and Nonduplication.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(i) Federal Demonstration of Technologies.--The Secretary 
shall make information available to purchasing and procurement 
programs of Federal agencies regarding the potential to 
demonstrate technologies resulting from activities funded 
through ARPA-E.]
  (j) Federal Demonstration of Technologies.--The Director 
shall seek opportunities to partner with purchasing and 
procurement programs of Federal agencies to demonstrate energy 
technologies resulting from activities funded through ARPA-E.
  (k) Events.--
          (1) The Director is authorized to convene, organize, 
        and sponsor events that further the objectives of ARPA-
        E, including events that assemble awardees, the most 
        promising applicants for ARPA-E funding, and a broad 
        range of ARPA-E stakeholders (which may include members 
        of relevant scientific research and academic 
        communities, government officials, financial 
        institutions, private investors, entrepreneurs, and 
        other private entities), for the purposes of--
                  (A) demonstrating projects of ARPA-E 
                awardees;
                  (B) demonstrating projects of finalists for 
                ARPA-E awards and other energy technology 
                projects;
                  (C) facilitating discussion of the commercial 
                application of energy technologies developed 
                under ARPA-E and other government-sponsored 
                research and development programs; or
                  (D) such other purposes as the Director 
                considers appropriate.
          (2) Funding for activities described in paragraph (1) 
        shall be provided as part of the technology transfer 
        and outreach activities authorized under subsection 
        (o)(4)(B).
  [(j)] (l) Advice.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(k)] (m) ARPA-E Evaluation.--
          (1) In general.--After ARPA-E has been in operation 
        for [4 years] 6 years, the Secretary shall offer to 
        enter into a contract with the National Academy of 
        Sciences under which the National Academy shall conduct 
        an evaluation of how well ARPA-E is achieving the goals 
        and mission of ARPA-E.
          (2) Inclusions.--The evaluation shall include--
                  (A) * * *
                  (B) a description of lessons learned from 
                operation of ARPA-E, and how those lessons may 
                apply to the operation of other programs within 
                the Department of Energy.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(l)] (n) Existing Authorities.--The authorities granted by 
this section are--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(m)] (o) Funding.--
          (1) * * *
          [(2) Authorization of appropriations.--Subject to 
        paragraphs (4) and (5), there are authorized to be 
        appropriated to the Director for deposit in the Fund, 
        without fiscal year limitation--
                  [(A) $300,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; and
                  [(B) such sums as are necessary for each of 
                fiscal years 2009 and 2010.]
          (2) Authorization of appropriations.--Subject to 
        paragraph (4), there are authorized to be appropriated 
        to the Director for deposit in the Fund, without fiscal 
        year limitation--
                  (A) $300,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
                  (B) $450,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
                  (C) $600,000,000 for fiscal year 2013;
                  (D) $800,000,000 for fiscal year 2014; and
                  (E) $1,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2015.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(4) Limitation.--No amounts may be appropriated for 
        ARPA-E for fiscal year 2008 unless the amount 
        appropriated for the activities of the Office of 
        Science of the Department for fiscal year 2008 exceeds 
        the amount appropriated for the Office for fiscal year 
        2007, as adjusted for inflation in accordance with the 
        Consumer Price Index published by the Bureau of Labor 
        Statistics of the Department of Labor.]
          [(5)] (4) Allocation.--Of the amounts appropriated 
        for a fiscal year under paragraph (2)--
                  (A) not more than 50 percent of the amount 
                shall be used to carry out subsection 
                (e)(3)(D);
                  (B) at least [2.5 percent] 5 percent of the 
                amount shall be used for technology transfer 
                and outreach activities, consistent with the 
                goal described in subsection (c)(2)(D) and 
                within the responsibilities of program 
                directors as specified in subsection 
                (g)(2)(B)(vii); and

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE VII--NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 7026. LABORATORY SCIENCE PILOT PROGRAM.

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(d) Sunset.--The provisions of this section shall cease to 
have force or effect on the last day of fiscal year 2010.
  [(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--From the amounts 
authorized under subsections (a)(2)(B), (b)(2)(B), and 
(c)(2)(B) of section 7002, there are authorized to be 
appropriated to carry out this section and the amendments made 
by this section $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, and such sums 
as may be necessary for each of the 2 succeeding fiscal years.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 7034. PROFESSIONAL SCIENCE MASTER'S DEGREE PROGRAMS.

  [(a) Clearinghouse.--
          [(1) Development.--The Director shall establish a 
        clearinghouse, 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, to share program elements used in 
        successful professional science master's degree 
        programs and other advanced degree programs related to 
        science, technology, engineering, and mathematics.
          [(2) Availability.--The Director shall make the 
        clearinghouse of program elements developed under 
        paragraph (1) available to institutions of higher 
        education that are developing professional science 
        master's degree programs.
  [(b) Programs.--
          [(1) Programs authorized.--The Director shall award 
        grants to 4-year institutions of higher education to 
        facilitate the institutions' creation or improvement of 
        professional science master's degree programs that may 
        include linkages between institutions of higher 
        education and industries that employ science-trained 
        personnel, with an emphasis on practical training and 
        preparation for the workforce in high-need fields.
          [(2) Application.--A 4-year institution of higher 
        education desiring a grant under this section shall 
        submit an application to the Director at such time, in 
        such manner, and accompanied by such information as the 
        Director may require. The application shall include--
                  [(A) a description of the professional 
                science master's degree program that the 
                institution of higher education will implement;
                  [(B) a description of how the professional 
                science master's degree program at the 
                institution of higher education will produce 
                individuals for the workforce in high-need 
                fields;
                  [(C) the amount of funding from non-Federal 
                sources, including from private industries, 
                that the institution of higher education shall 
                use to support the professional science 
                master's degree program; and
                  [(D) an assurance that the institution of 
                higher education shall encourage students in 
                the professional science master's degree 
                program to apply for all forms of Federal 
                assistance available to such students, 
                including applicable 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 institutions 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 performance 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 agencies 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 
                performance benchmarks developed under 
                subparagraph (A) shall not be eligible for 
                further funding.
                  [(C) Report.--Not later than 180 days after 
                the completion 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 legislative action 
                        that could optimize the effectiveness 
                        of the pilot programs, as the Director 
                        determines to be appropriate.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


         DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY SCIENCE EDUCATION ENHANCEMENT ACT

DIVISION C--OTHER NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATIONS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE XXXI--DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NATIONAL SECURITY PROGRAMS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Part E--Department of Energy Science Education Programs

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subpart A--Science Education Enhancement

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 3164. SCIENCE EDUCATION PROGRAMS.

  [(a) Programs.--The Secretary is authorized to establish 
programs to enhance the quality of mathematics, science, and 
engineering education. Any such programs shall be operated at 
or through the support of Department research and development 
facilities, shall use the scientific resources of the 
Department, and shall be consistent with the overall Federal 
plan for education and human resources in science and 
technology developed by the Federal Coordinating Council for 
Science, Engineering, and Technology.
  [(b) Organization of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics 
Education Programs.--
          [(1) Director of science, engineering, and 
        mathematics education.--Notwithstanding any other 
        provision of law, the Secretary, acting through the 
        Under Secretary for Science (referred to in this 
        subsection as the ``Under Secretary''), shall appoint a 
        Director of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics 
        Education (referred to in this subsection as the 
        ``Director'') with the principal responsibility for 
        administering science, engineering, and mathematics 
        education programs across all functions of the 
        Department.
          [(2) Qualifications.--The Director shall be an 
        individual, who by reason of professional background 
        and experience, is specially qualified to advise the 
        Under Secretary on all matters pertaining to science, 
        engineering, and mathematics education at the 
        Department.
          [(3) Duties.--The Director shall--
                  [(A) oversee all science, engineering, and 
                mathematics education programs of the 
                Department;
                  [(B) represent the Department as the 
                principal interagency liaison for all science, 
                engineering, and mathematics education 
                programs, unless otherwise represented by the 
                Secretary or the Under Secretary;
                  [(C) prepare the annual budget and advise the 
                Under Secretary on all budgetary issues for 
                science, engineering, and mathematics education 
                programs of the Department;
                  [(D) increase, to the maximum extent 
                practicable, the participation and advancement 
                of women and underrepresented minorities at 
                every level of science, technology, 
                engineering, and mathematics education; and
                  [(E) perform other such matters relating to 
                science, engineering, and mathematics education 
                as are required by the Secretary or the Under 
                Secretary.
          [(4) Staff and other resources.--The Secretary shall 
        assign to the Director such personnel and other 
        resources as the Secretary considers necessary to 
        permit the Director to carry out the duties of the 
        Director.
          [(5) Assessment.--
                  [(A) In general.--The Secretary shall offer 
                to enter into a contract with the National 
                Academy of Sciences under which the National 
                Academy, not later than 5 years after, and not 
                later than 10 years after, the date of 
                enactment of this paragraph, shall assess the 
                performance of the science, engineering, and 
                mathematics education programs of the 
                Department.
                  [(B) Considerations.--An assessment under 
                this paragraph shall be conducted taking into 
                consideration, where applicable, the effect of 
                science, engineering, and mathematics education 
                programs of the Department on student academic 
                achievement in science and mathematics.
          [(6) Authorization of appropriations.--There are 
        authorized to be appropriated such sums as are 
        necessary to carry out this subsection.
  [(c) Relationship to Other Department Activities.--The 
programs described in subsection (a) shall supplement and be 
coordinated with current activities of the Department, but 
shall not supplant them.
  [(d) Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Education Fund.--
The Secretary shall establish a Science, Engineering, and 
Mathematics Education Fund, using not less than 0.3 percent of 
the amount made available to the Department for research, 
development, demonstration, and commercial application for each 
fiscal year, to carry out sections 3165, 3166, and 3167.
  [(e) Annual Plan for Allocation of Education Funding.--The 
Secretary shall submit to Congress as part of the annual budget 
submission for a fiscal year a report describing the manner in 
which the Department has complied with subsection (d) for the 
prior fiscal year and the manner in which the Department 
proposes to comply with subsection (d) during the following 
fiscal year, including--
          [(1) the total amount of funding for research, 
        development, demonstration, and commercial application 
        activities for the corresponding fiscal year;
          [(2) the amounts set aside for the Science, 
        Engineering, and Mathematics Education Fund under 
        subsection (d) from funding for research activities, 
        development activities, demonstration activities, and 
        commercial application activities for the corresponding 
        fiscal year; and
          [(3) a description of how the funds set aside under 
        subsection (d) were allocated for the prior fiscal year 
        and will be allocated for the following fiscal year.
  [(f) Programs for Students From Under-Represented Groups.--In 
carrying out a program under subsection (a), the Secretary 
shall give priority to activities that are designed to 
encourage students from under-represented groups to pursue 
scientific and technical careers.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


  Subpart B--Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Education Programs

SEC. 3170. DEFINITIONS.

  In this subpart:
          [(1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the 
        Director of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics 
        Education.]
          (1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the 
        Director of STEM Education appointed or designated 
        under section 3171(c)(1).
          (2) Energy systems science and engineering.--The term 
        ``energy systems science and engineering'' means--
                  (A) nuclear science and engineering, 
                including--
                          (i) nuclear engineering;
                          (ii) nuclear chemistry;
                          (iii) radiochemistry; and
                          (iv) health physics;
                  (B) hydrocarbon system science and 
                engineering, including--
                          (i) petroleum or reservoir 
                        engineering;
                          (ii) environmental geoscience;
                          (iii) petrophysics;
                          (iv) geophysics;
                          (v) geochemistry;
                          (vi) petroleum geology;
                          (vii) ocean engineering; and
                          (viii) environmental engineering;
                  (C) energy efficiency and renewable energy 
                technology systems science and engineering, 
                including with respect to--
                  (i) solar technology systems;
                  (ii) wind technology systems;
                  (iii) buildings technology systems;
                  (iv) transportation technology systems;
                  (v) hydropower systems; and
                  (vi) geothermal systems; and
                  (D) energy storage and distribution systems 
                science and engineering, including with respect 
                to--
                          (i) energy storage; and
                          (ii) energy delivery.
          [(2)] (3) National laboratory.--The term ``National 
        Laboratory'' has the meaning given the term in section 
        2 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 15801).
          (4) STEM.--The term ``STEM'' means science, 
        technology, engineering, and mathematics.

 [CHAPTER 1--PILOT PROGRAM OF GRANTS TO SPECIALTY SCHOOLS FOR SCIENCE 
                            AND MATHEMATICS

[SEC. 3171. PILOT PROGRAM OF GRANTS TO SPECIALTY SCHOOLS FOR SCIENCE 
                    AND MATHEMATICS.

  [(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to establish a 
pilot program of grants to States to help establish or expand 
public, statewide specialty secondary schools that provide 
comprehensive science and mathematics (including technology and 
engineering) education to improve the academic achievement of 
students in science and mathematics.
  [(b) Definition of Specialty School for Science and 
Mathematics.--In this chapter, the term ``specialty school for 
science and mathematics'' means a public secondary school 
(including a school that provides residential services to 
students) that--
          [(1) serves students residing in the State in which 
        the school is located; and
          [(2) offers to those students a high-quality, 
        comprehensive science and mathematics (including 
        technology and engineering) curriculum designed to 
        improve the academic achievement of students in science 
        and mathematics.
  [(c) Pilot Program Authorized.--
          [(1) In general.--From the amounts authorized under 
        subsection (i), the Secretary, acting through the 
        Director and in consultation with the Director of the 
        National Science Foundation, shall award grants, on a 
        competitive basis, to States in order to provide 
        assistance to the States for the costs of establishing 
        or expanding public, statewide specialty schools for 
        science and mathematics.
          [(2) Resources.--The Director shall ensure that 
        appropriate resources of the Department, including the 
        National Laboratories, are available to schools funded 
        under this section in order to--
                  [(A) increase experiential, hands-on learning 
                opportunities in science, technology, 
                engineering, and mathematics for students 
                attending such schools; and
                  [(B) provide ongoing professional development 
                opportunities for teachers employed at such 
                schools.
          [(3) Assistance.--Consistent with sections 3165 and 
        3166, the Director shall make available from funds 
        authorized in this section to carry out a program using 
        scientific and engineering staff of the National 
        Laboratories, during which the staff--
                  [(A) assists teachers in teaching courses at 
                the schools funded under this section;
                  [(B) uses National Laboratory scientific 
                equipment in teaching the courses; and
                  [(C) uses distance education and other 
                technologies to provide assistance described in 
                subparagraphs (A) and (B) to schools funded 
                under this section that are not located near 
                the National Laboratories.
          [(4) Restrictions.--
                  [(A) Maximum number of funded specialty 
                schools per state.--No State shall receive 
                funding for more than 1 specialty school for 
                science and mathematics for a fiscal year.
                  [(B) Maximum amount and duration of grants.--
                A grant awarded to a State for a specialty 
                school for science and mathematics under this 
                section--
                          [(i) shall not exceed $2,000,000 for 
                        a fiscal year; and
                          [(ii) shall not be provided for more 
                        than 3 fiscal years.
  [(d) Federal and Non-Federal Shares.--
          [(1) Federal share.--The Federal share of the costs 
        described in subsection (c)(1) shall not exceed 33 
        percent.
          [(2) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the 
        costs described in subsection (c)(1) shall be--
                  [(A) not less than 67 percent; and
                  [(B) provided from non-Federal sources, in 
                cash or in kind, fairly evaluated, including 
                services.
  [(e) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
this section, a State shall submit to the Director an 
application at such time, in such manner, and containing such 
information as the Director may require that describes--
          [(1) the process by which and selection criteria with 
        which the State will select and designate a school as a 
        specialty school for science and mathematics in 
        accordance with this section;
          [(2) how the State will ensure that funds made 
        available under this section are used to establish or 
        expand a specialty school for science and mathematics--
                  [(A) in accordance with the activities 
                described in subsection (g); and
                  [(B) that has the capacity to improve the 
                academic achievement of all students in all 
                core academic subjects, and particularly in 
                science and mathematics;
          [(3) how the State will measure the extent to which 
        the school increases student academic achievement on 
        State academic achievement standards in science, 
        mathematics, and, to the maximum extent applicable, 
        technology and engineering;
          [(4) the curricula and materials to be used in the 
        school;
          [(5) the availability of funds from non-Federal 
        sources for the costs of the activities authorized 
        under this section; and
          [(6) how the State will use technical assistance and 
        support from the Department, including the National 
        Laboratories, and other entities with experience and 
        expertise in science, technology, engineering, and 
        mathematics education, including institutions of higher 
        education.
  [(f) Distribution.--In awarding grants under this section, 
the Director shall--
          [(1) ensure a wide, equitable distribution among 
        States that propose to serve students from urban and 
        rural areas; and
          [(2) provide equal consideration to States without 
        National Laboratories.
  [(g) Uses of Funds.--
          [(1) Requirement.--A State that receives a grant 
        under this section shall use the funds made available 
        through the grant to--
                  [(A) employ proven strategies and methods for 
                improving student learning and teaching in 
                science, technology, engineering, and 
                mathematics;
                  [(B) integrate into the curriculum of the 
                school comprehensive science and mathematics 
                education, including instruction and 
                assessments in science, mathematics, and to the 
                extent applicable, technology and engineering 
                that are aligned with the academic content and 
                student academic achievement standards of the 
                State, within the meaning of section 1111 of 
                the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
                1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311);
                  [(C) create opportunities for enhanced and 
                ongoing professional development for teachers 
                that improves the science, technology, 
                engineering, and mathematics content knowledge 
                of the teachers; and
                  [(D) design and implement hands-on laboratory 
                experiences to help prepare students to pursue 
                postsecondary studies in science, technology, 
                engineering, and mathematics fields.
          [(2) Special rule.--Grant funds under this section 
        may be used for activities described in paragraph (1) 
        only if the activities are directly relating to 
        improving student academic achievement in science, 
        mathematics, and to the extent applicable, technology 
        and engineering.
  [(h) Evaluation and Report.--
          [(1) State evaluation and report.--
                  [(A) Evaluation.--Each State that receives a 
                grant under this section shall develop and 
                carry out an evaluation and accountability plan 
                for the activities funded through the grant 
                that measures the impact of the activities, 
                including measurable objectives for improved 
                student academic achievement on State science, 
                mathematics, and, to the maximum extent 
                applicable, technology and engineering 
                assessments.
                  [(B) Report.--The State shall submit to the 
                Director a report containing the results of the 
                evaluation and accountability plan.
          [(2) Report to congress.--Not later than 2 years 
        after the date of enactment of the PACE-Energy Act, the 
        Director shall submit a report detailing the impact of 
        the activities assisted with funds made available under 
        this section to--
                  [(A) the Committee on Science and Technology 
                of the House of Representatives;
                  [(B) the Committee on Energy and Natural 
                Resources of the Senate; and
                  [(C) the Committee on Health, Education, 
                Labor, and Pensions of the Senate.
  [(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section--
          [(1) $14,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
          [(2) $22,500,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
          [(3) $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.

         [CHAPTER 2--EXPERIENTIAL-BASED LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES

[SEC. 3175. EXPERIENTIAL-BASED LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES.

  [(a) Internships Authorized.--
          [(1) In general.--From the amounts authorized under 
        subsection (f), the Secretary, acting through the 
        Director, shall establish a summer internship program 
        for middle school and secondary school students that 
        shall--
                  [(A) provide the students with internships at 
                the National Laboratories;
                  [(B) promote experiential, hands-on learning 
                in science, technology, engineering, or 
                mathematics; and
                  [(C) be of at least 2 weeks in duration.
          [(2) Residential services.--The Director may provide 
        residential services to students participating in the 
        internship program authorized under paragraph (1).
  [(b) Selection Criteria.--
          [(1) In general.--The Director shall establish 
        criteria to determine the sufficient level of academic 
        preparedness necessary for a student to be eligible for 
        an internship under this section.
          [(2) Participation.--The Director shall ensure the 
        participation of students from a wide distribution of 
        States, including States without National Laboratories.
          [(3) Student achievement.--The Director may consider 
        the academic achievement of middle and secondary school 
        students in determining eligibility under this section, 
        in accordance with paragraphs (1) and (2).
  [(c) Priority.--
          [(1) In general.--The Director shall give priority 
        for an internship under this section to a student who 
        meets the eligibility criteria described in subsection 
        (b) and who attends a school--
                  [(A)(i) in which not less than 30 percent of 
                the children enrolled in the school are from 
                low-income families; or
                  [(ii) that is designated with a school locale 
                code of 41, 42, or 43, as determined by the 
                Secretary of Education; and
                  [(B) for which there is--
                          [(i) a high percentage of teachers 
                        who are not teaching in the academic 
                        subject areas or grade levels in which 
                        the teachers were trained to teach;
                          [(ii) a high teacher turnover rate; 
                        or
                          [(iii) a high percentage of teachers 
                        with emergency, provisional, or 
                        temporary certification or licenses.
          [(2) Coordination.--The Director shall consult with 
        the Secretary of Education in order to determine 
        whether a student meets the priority requirements of 
        this subsection.
  [(d) Outreach and Experiential-Based Programs for Minority 
Students.--
          [(1) In general.--The Secretary, acting through the 
        Director, in cooperation with Hispanic-serving 
        institutions, historically Black colleges and 
        universities, tribally controlled colleges and 
        universities, Alaska Native- and Native Hawaiian-
        serving institutions, and other minority-serving 
        institutions and nonprofit entities with substantial 
        experience relating to outreach and experiential-based 
        learning projects, shall establish outreach and 
        experiential-based learning programs that will 
        encourage underrepresented minority students in 
        kindergarten through grade 12 to pursue careers in 
        science, engineering, and mathematics.
          [(2) Community involvement.--The Secretary shall 
        ensure that the programs established under paragraph 
        (1) involve, to the maximum extent practicable--
                  [(A) participation by parents and educators; 
                and
                  [(B) the establishment of partnerships with 
                business organizations and appropriate Federal, 
                State, and local agencies.
          [(3) Distribution.--The Secretary shall ensure that 
        the programs established under paragraph (1) are 
        located in diverse geographic regions of the United 
        States, to the maximum extent practicable.
  [(e) Evaluation and Accountability Plan.--The Director shall 
develop an evaluation and accountability plan for the 
activities funded under this chapter that objectively measures 
the impact of the activities.
  [(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to 
be appropriated to carry out this section $7,500,000 for each 
of fiscal years 2008 through 2010.

  [CHAPTER 3--NATIONAL LABORATORIES CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE IN SCIENCE, 
           TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION

[SEC. 3181. NATIONAL LABORATORIES CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE IN SCIENCE, 
                    TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION.

  [(a) Definition of High-Need Public Secondary School.--In 
this section, the term ``high-need public secondary school'' 
means a secondary school--
          [(1) with a high concentration of low-income 
        individuals (as defined in section 1707 of the 
        Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 
        U.S.C. 6537)); or
          [(2) designated with a school locale code of 41, 42, 
        or 43, as determined by the Secretary of Education.
  [(b) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish at each of 
the National Laboratories a program to support a Center of 
Excellence in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics 
(referred to in this section as a ``Center of Excellence'') in 
at least 1 high-need public secondary school located in the 
region served by the National Laboratory to provide assistance 
in accordance with subsection (f).
  [(c) Collaboration.--
          [(1) In general.--To comply with subsection (g), each 
        high-need public secondary school selected as a Center 
        of Excellence and the National Laboratory shall form a 
        partnership with a school, department, or program of 
        education at an institution of higher education.
          [(2) Nonprofit entities.--The partnership may include 
        a nonprofit entity with demonstrated experience and 
        effectiveness in science or mathematics, as agreed to 
        by other members of the partnership.
  [(d) Selection.--
          [(1) In general.--The Secretary, acting through the 
        Director, shall establish criteria to guide the 
        National Laboratories in selecting the sites for 
        Centers of Excellence.
          [(2) Process.--A National Laboratory shall select a 
        site for a Center of Excellence through an open, 
        widely-publicized, and competitive process.
  [(e) Goals.--The Secretary shall establish goals and 
performance assessments for each Center of Excellence 
authorized under subsection (b).
  [(f) Assistance.--Consistent with sections 3165 and 3166, the 
Director shall make available necessary assistance for a 
program established under this section through the use of 
scientific and engineering staff of a National Laboratory, 
including the use of staff--
          [(1) to assist teachers in teaching a course at a 
        Center of Excellence in Science, Technology, 
        Engineering, and Mathematics; and
          [(2) to use National Laboratory scientific equipment 
        in the teaching of the course.
  [(g) Special Rules.--A Center of Excellence in a region shall 
ensure--
          [(1) provision of clinical practicum, student 
        teaching, or internship experiences for science, 
        technology, and mathematics teacher candidates as part 
        of the teacher preparation program of the Center of 
        Excellence;
          [(2) provision of supervision and mentoring for 
        teacher candidates in the teacher preparation program; 
        and
          [(3) to the maximum extent practicable, provision of 
        professional development for veteran teachers in the 
        public secondary schools in the region.
  [(h) Evaluation.--The Secretary shall consider the results of 
performance assessments required under subsection (e) in 
determining the contract award fee of a National Laboratory 
management and operations contractor.
  [(i) Plan.--The Director shall--
          [(1) develop an evaluation and accountability plan 
        for the activities funded under this section that 
        objectively measures the impact of the activities; and
          [(2) disseminate information obtained from those 
        measurements.
  [(j) No Effect on Similar Programs.--Nothing in this section 
displaces or otherwise affects any similar program being 
carried out as of the date of enactment of this section at any 
National Laboratory under any other provision of law.

                     [CHAPTER 4--SUMMER INSTITUTES

[SEC. 3185. SUMMER INSTITUTES.

  [(a) Definitions.--In this section:
          [(1) Eligible partner.--The term ``eligible partner'' 
        means--
                  [(A) the science, engineering, or mathematics 
                department at an institution of higher 
                education, acting in coordination with a 
                school, department, or program of education at 
                an institution of higher education that 
                provides training for teachers and principals; 
                or
                  [(B) a nonprofit entity with expertise in 
                providing professional development for science, 
                technology, engineering, or mathematics 
                teachers.
          [(2) Summer institute.--The term ``summer institute'' 
        means an institute, operated during the summer, that--
                  [(A) is hosted by a National Laboratory or an 
                eligible partner;
                  [(B) is operated for a period of not less 
                than 2 weeks;
                  [(C) includes, as a component, a program that 
                provides direct interaction between students 
                and faculty, including personnel of 1 or more 
                National Laboratories who have scientific 
                expertise;
                  [(D) provides for follow-up training, during 
                the academic year, that is conducted in the 
                classroom; and
                  [(E) provides hands-on science, technology, 
                engineering, or mathematics laboratory 
                experience for not less than 2 days.
  [(b) Summer Institute Programs Authorized.--
          [(1) Programs at the national laboratories.--The 
        Secretary, acting through the Director, shall establish 
        or expand programs of summer institutes at each of the 
        National Laboratories to provide additional training to 
        strengthen the science, technology, engineering, and 
        mathematics teaching skills of teachers employed at 
        public schools for kindergarten through grade 12, in 
        accordance with the activities authorized under 
        paragraphs (3) and (4).
          [(2) Programs with eligible partners.--
                  [(A) In general.--The Secretary, acting 
                through the Director, shall identify and 
                provide assistance as described in subparagraph 
                (C) to eligible partners to establish or expand 
                programs of summer institutes that provide 
                additional training to strengthen the science, 
                technology, engineering, and mathematics 
                teaching skills of teachers employed at public 
                schools for kindergarten through grade 12, in 
                accordance with paragraphs (3) and (4).
                  [(B) Selection criteria.--In identifying 
                eligible partners under subparagraph (A), the 
                Secretary shall require that partner 
                institutions describe--
                          [(i) how the partner institution has 
                        the capability to administer the 
                        program in accordance with this 
                        section, which may include a 
                        description of any existing programs at 
                        the institution of the applicant that 
                        are targeted at education of science 
                        and mathematics teachers and the number 
                        of teachers graduated annually from the 
                        programs; and
                          [(ii) how the partner institution 
                        will assist the National Laboratory in 
                        carrying out the activities described 
                        in paragraphs (3) and (4).
                  [(C) Assistance.--Consistent with sections 
                3165 and 3166, the Director shall make 
                available funds authorized under this section 
                to carry out a program using scientific and 
                engineering staff of the National Laboratories, 
                during which the staff--
                          [(i) assists in providing training to 
                        teachers at summer institutes; and
                          [(ii) uses National Laboratory 
                        scientific equipment in the training.
          [(3) Required activities.--Funds authorized under 
        this section shall be used for--
                  [(A) creating opportunities for enhanced and 
                ongoing professional development for teachers 
                that improves the science, technology, 
                engineering, and mathematics content knowledge 
                of the teachers;
                  [(B) training to improve the ability of 
                science, technology, engineering, and 
                mathematics teachers to translate content 
                knowledge and recent developments in pedagogy 
                into classroom practice, including training to 
                use curricula that are--
                          [(i) based on scientific research; 
                        and
                          [(ii) aligned with challenging State 
                        academic content standards;
                  [(C) training on the use and integration of 
                technology in the classrooms; and
                  [(D) supplemental and follow-up professional 
                development activities as described in 
                subsection (a)(2)(D).
          [(4) Additional uses of funds.--Funds authorized 
        under this section may be used for--
                  [(A) training and classroom materials to 
                assist in carrying out paragraph (3);
                  [(B) expenses associated with scientific and 
                engineering staff at the National Laboratories 
                assisting in providing training to teachers at 
                summer institutes;
                  [(C) instruction in the use and integration 
                of data and assessments to inform and instruct 
                classroom practice; and
                  [(D) stipends and travel expenses for 
                teachers participating in the program.
  [(c) Priority.--To the maximum extent practicable, the 
Director shall ensure that each summer institute program 
authorized under subsection (b) provides training to--
          [(1) teachers from a wide range of school districts;
          [(2) teachers from high-need school districts; and
          [(3) teachers from groups underrepresented in the 
        fields of science, technology, engineering, and 
        mathematics teaching, including women and members of 
        minority groups.
  [(d) Coordination and Consultation.--The Director shall 
consult and coordinate with the Secretary of Education and the 
Director of the National Science Foundation regarding the 
implementation of the programs authorized under subsection (b).
  [(e) Evaluation and Accountability Plan.--
          [(1) In general.--The Director shall develop an 
        evaluation and accountability plan for the activities 
        funded under this section that measures the impact of 
        the activities.
          [(2) Contents.--The evaluation and accountability 
        plan shall include--
                  [(A) measurable objectives to increase the 
                number of science, technology, and mathematics 
                teachers who participate in the summer 
                institutes involved; and
                  [(B) measurable objectives for improved 
                student academic achievement on State science, 
                mathematics, and to the maximum extent 
                applicable, technology and engineering 
                assessments.
          [(3) Report to congress.--The Secretary shall submit 
        to Congress with the annual budget submission of the 
        Secretary a report on how the activities assisted under 
        this section improve the science, technology, 
        engineering, and mathematics teaching skills of 
        participating teachers.
  [(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section--
          [(1) $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
          [(2) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
          [(3) $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2010.]

                       CHAPTER 1--STEM EDUCATION

SEC. 3171. STEM EDUCATION.

  (a) In general.--The Secretary of Energy shall develop, 
conduct, support, promote, and coordinate formal and informal 
educational activities that leverage the Department's unique 
content expertise and facilities to contribute to improving 
STEM education at all levels in the United States, and to 
enhance awareness and understanding of STEM, including energy 
sciences, in order to create a diverse skilled scientific and 
technical workforce essential to meeting the challenges facing 
the Department and the Nation in the 21st century.
  (b) Programs.--The Secretary shall carry out evidence-based 
programs designed to increase student interest and 
participation, improve public literacy and support, and improve 
the teaching and learning of energy systems science and 
engineering and other STEM disciplines supported by the 
Department. Programs authorized under this subsection may 
include--
          (1) informal educational programming designed to 
        excite and inspire students and the general public 
        about energy systems science and engineering and other 
        STEM disciplines supported by the Department, while 
        strengthening their content knowledge in these fields;
          (2) teacher training and professional development 
        opportunities for pre-service and in-service elementary 
        and secondary teachers designed to increase the content 
        knowledge of teachers in energy systems science and 
        engineering and other STEM disciplines supported by the 
        Department, including through hands-on research 
        experiences;
          (3) research opportunities for secondary school 
        students, including internships at the National 
        Laboratories, that provide secondary school students 
        with hands-on research experiences as well as exposure 
        to working scientists;
          (4) research opportunities at the National 
        Laboratories for undergraduate and graduate students 
        pursuing degrees in energy systems science and 
        engineering and other STEM disciplines supported by the 
        Department; and
          (5) competitive scholarships, fellowships, and 
        traineeships for undergraduate and graduate students in 
        energy systems science and engineering and other STEM 
        disciplines supported by the Department.
  (c) Organization of STEM Education Programs.--
          (1) Director of stem education.--The Secretary shall 
        appoint or designate a Director of STEM Education, who 
        shall have the principal responsibility to oversee and 
        coordinate all programs and activities of the 
        Department in support of STEM education, including 
        energy systems science and engineering education, 
        across all functions of the Department.
          (2) Qualifications.--The Director shall be an 
        individual, who by reason of professional background 
        and experience, is specially qualified to advise the 
        Secretary on all matters pertaining to STEM education, 
        including energy systems science and engineering 
        education, at the Department.
          (3) Duties.--The Director shall--
                  (A) oversee and coordinate all programs in 
                support of STEM education, including energy 
                systems science and engineering education, 
                across all functions of the Department;
                  (B) represent the Department as the principal 
                interagency liaison for all STEM education 
                programs, unless otherwise represented by the 
                Secretary, the Under Secretary for Science, or 
                the Under Secretary for Energy;
                  (C) prepare the annual budget and advise the 
                Under Secretary for Science and the Under 
                Secretary for Energy on all budgetary issues 
                for STEM education, including energy systems 
                science and engineering education, relative to 
                the programs of the Department;
                  (D) establish, periodically update, and 
                maintain a publicly accessible online inventory 
                of STEM education programs and activities, 
                including energy systems science and 
                engineering education programs and activities;
                  (E) develop, implement, and update the 
                Department of Energy STEM education strategic 
                plan, as required by subsection (d);
                  (F) increase, to the maximum extent 
                practicable, the participation and advancement 
                of women and underrepresented minorities at 
                every level of STEM education, including energy 
                systems science and engineering education; and
                  (G) perform such other matters relating to 
                STEM education as are required by the 
                Secretary, the Under Secretary for Science, or 
                the Under Secretary for Energy.
  (d) Department of energy stem education strategic plan.--The 
Director of STEM education appointed or designated under 
subsection (c)(1) shall develop, implement, and update once 
every 3 years a 3-year STEM education strategic plan for the 
Department, which shall--
          (1) identify and prioritize annual and long-term STEM 
        education goals and objectives for the Department that 
        are aligned with the overall goals of the National 
        Science and Technology Council Committee on STEM 
        Education Strategic plan required under section 
        301(d)(2) of the STEM Education Coordination Act of 
        2010;
          (2) describe the role of each program or activity of 
        the Department in contributing to the goals and 
        objectives identified under paragraph (1);
          (3) specify the metrics that will be used to assess 
        progress toward achieving those goals and objectives; 
        and
          (4) describe the approaches that will be taken to 
        assess the effectiveness of each STEM education program 
        and activity supported by the Department.
  (e) Outreach to students from underrepresented groups.--In 
carrying out a program authorized under this section, the 
Secretary shall give consideration to the goal of promoting the 
participation of individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of 
the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 
1885a or 1885b).
  (f) Consultation and partnership with other agencies.--In 
carrying out the programs and activities authorized under this 
section, the Secretary shall--
          (1) consult with the Secretary of Education and the 
        Director of the National Science Foundation regarding 
        activities designed to improve elementary and secondary 
        STEM education; and
          (2) consult and partner with the Director of the 
        National Science Foundation in carrying out programs 
        under this section designed to build capacity in STEM 
        education at the undergraduate and graduate level, 
        including by supporting excellent proposals in energy 
        systems science and engineering that are submitted for 
        funding to the Foundation's Advanced Technological 
        Education Program.

            CHAPTER 5--NATIONAL ENERGY EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT

SEC. 3191. NATIONAL ENERGY EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT.

  (a) In General.--The Secretary, acting through the Director 
and in consultation with the Director of the National Science 
Foundation, shall establish a program to coordinate and make 
available to teachers and students [web-based], through a 
publicly available website, kindergarten through high school 
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education 
resources relating to the science and energy mission of the 
Department, including existing instruction materials and 
protocols for classroom laboratory experiments and project-
based learning opportunities.
  (b) Energy Education.--The materials and other resources 
required under subsection (a) shall include instruction 
relating to--
          (1) the science of energy, including energy systems 
        science and engineering;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
to be appropriated to carry out this section--
          [(1) $500,000 for fiscal year 2008; and
          [(2) such sums as necessary for each fiscal year 
        thereafter.]

                       [CHAPTER 6--ADMINISTRATION

[SEC. 3195. MENTORING PROGRAM.

  [(a) In General.--As part of the programs established under 
chapters 1, 3, and 4, the Director shall establish a program to 
recruit and provide mentors for women and underrepresented 
minorities who are interested in careers in science, 
engineering, and mathematics.
  [(b) Pairing.--The program shall pair mentors with women and 
minorities who are in programs of study at specialty schools 
for science and mathematics, Centers of Excellence, and summer 
institutes established under chapters 1, 3, and 4, 
respectively.
  [(c) Program Evaluation.--The Secretary shall annually--
          [(1) use metrics to evaluate the success of the 
        programs established under subsection (a); and
          [(2) submit to Congress a report that describes the 
        results of each evaluation.]
                              ----------                              


NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY ACT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                ESTABLISHMENT, FUNCTIONS, AND ACTIVITIES

  Sec. 2. (a) * * *
  (b) The Secretary of Commerce (hereafter in this Act referred 
to as the ``Secretary'') acting through the Director of the 
Institute (hereafter in this Act referred to as the 
``Director'') is authorized to take all actions necessary and 
appropriate to accomplish the purposes of this Act, including 
the following functions of the Institute--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (12) to invent, develop, and (when appropriate) 
        promote transfer to the private sector of measurement 
        devices to serve special national needs; [and]
          (13) to coordinate Federal, State, and local 
        technical standards activities and conformity 
        assessment activities, with private sector technical 
        standards activities and conformity assessment 
        activities, with the goal of eliminating unnecessary 
        duplication and complexity in the development and 
        promulgation of conformity assessment requirements and 
        measures[.];
          (14) to promote collaboration among Federal 
        departments and agencies and private sector 
        stakeholders in the development and implementation of 
        standards and conformity assessment frameworks to 
        address specific Federal Government policy goals; and
          (15) to convene Federal departments and agencies, as 
        appropriate, to--
                  (A) coordinate and determine Federal 
                Government positions on specific policy issues 
                related to the development of international 
                technical standards and conformity assessment-
                related activities; and
                  (B) coordinate Federal department and agency 
                engagement in the development of international 
                technical standards and conformity assessment-
                related activities.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [Sec. 4.]

SEC. 4. UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY.

  (a) Establishment.--There shall be in the Department of 
Commerce an Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and 
Technology (in this section referred to as the ``Under 
Secretary'').
  (b) Appointment.--The Under Secretary shall be appointed by 
the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
  (c) Compensation.--The Under Secretary shall be compensated 
at the rate in effect for level III of the Executive Schedule 
under section 5314 of title 5, United States Code.
  (d) Duties.--The Under Secretary shall serve as the Director 
of the Institute and shall perform such duties as required of 
the Director by the Secretary under this Act or by law.
  (e) Applicability.--The individual serving as the Director of 
the Institute on the date of enactment of the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology Authorization Act of 2010 
shall also serve as the Under Secretary until such time as a 
successor is appointed under subsection (b).
  Sec. 5. [The Director shall be appointed by the President, by 
and with the advice and consent of the Senate.] The Director 
shall report directly to the Secretary and shall have the 
general supervision of the Institute, its equipment, and the 
exercise of its functions. The Director shall make an annual 
report to the Secretary of Commerce. The Director may issue, 
when necessary, bulletins for public distribution, containing 
such information as may be of value to the public or facilitate 
the exercise of the functions of the Institute. [The Director 
shall be compensated at the rate in effect for level IV of the 
Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5, United States 
Code. Until such time as the Director assumes office under this 
section, the most recent Director of the National Bureau of 
Standards shall serve as Director.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


               VISITING COMMITTEE ON ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY

  Sec. 10. (a) There is established within the Institute a 
Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology (hereafter in this 
Act referred to as the ``Committee''). The Committee shall 
consist of [15 members] at least 15, but not more than 20, 
members appointed by the Director, [at least 10] at least 13 of 
whom shall be from United States industry. The Director shall 
appoint as original members of the Committee any final members 
of the National Bureau of Standards Visiting Committee who wish 
to serve in such capacity. In addition to any powers and 
functions otherwise granted to it by this Act, the Committee 
shall review and make recommendations regarding general policy 
for the Institute, its organization, its budget, and its 
programs within the framework of applicable national policies 
as set forth by the President and the Congress.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (h)(1) The Committee shall render an annual report to the 
Secretary for submission to the Congress not later than 30 days 
after the submittal to Congress of the President's annual 
budget request in each year. Such report shall deal 
essentially, though not necessarily exclusively, with policy 
issues or matters which affect the Institute, including the 
[Program established under section 28] programs established 
under sections 28 and 34, or with which the Committee in its 
official role as the private sector policy advisor of the 
Institute is concerned. Each such report shall identify areas 
of research and research techniques of the Institute of 
potential importance to the long-term competitiveness of United 
States industry, in which the Institute possesses special 
competence, which could be used to assist United States 
enterprises and United States industrial joint research and 
development ventures. Such report also shall comment on the 
programmatic planning document and updates thereto submitted to 
Congress by the Director under subsections (c) and (d) of 
section 23.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  Sec. 18. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) Underrepresented Minorities.--In evaluating applications 
for fellowships under this section, the Director shall give 
consideration to the goal of promoting the participation of 
underrepresented minorities in research areas supported by the 
Institute.
  Sec. 19. The Institute in conjunction with the National 
Academy of Sciences, shall establish and conduct a post-
doctoral fellowship program, subject to the availability of 
appropriations, which shall be organized and carried out in 
substantially the same manner as the National Academy of 
Sciences/National Research Council Post-Doctoral Research 
Associate Program that was in effect prior to 1986, and which 
shall include not less than twenty nor more than 120 new 
fellows per fiscal year. In evaluating applications for 
fellowships under this section, the Director shall give 
consideration to the goal of promoting the participation of 
underrepresented minorities in research areas supported by the 
Institute.
  Sec. 19A. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c) The Director shall develop and issue procedures and 
selection criteria for participants in the program. The 
Director shall give special consideration to an application 
from a teacher from a high-need school, as defined in section 
200 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1021).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


     REGIONAL CENTERS FOR THE TRANSFER OF MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY

  Sec. 25. (a) The Secretary, through the Director and, if 
appropriate, through other officials, shall provide assistance 
for the creation and support of Regional Centers for the 
Transfer of Manufacturing Technology (hereafter in this Act 
referred to as the ``Centers''). Such centers shall be 
affiliated with any United States-based nonprofit institution 
or organization, or group thereof, that applies for and is 
awarded financial assistance under this section in accordance 
with the description published by the Secretary in the Federal 
Register under subsection (c)(2). Individual awards shall be 
decided on the basis of merit review. The objective of the 
Centers is to enhance productivity and technological 
performance in United States manufacturing through--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (4) the active dissemination of scientific, 
        engineering, technical, and management information 
        about manufacturing to industrial firms, including 
        small- and medium-sized manufacturing companies; [and]
          (5) the utilization, when appropriate, of the 
        expertise and capability that exists in Federal 
        laboratories other than the Institute[.]; and
          (6) providing to community colleges information about 
        the job skills needed in small- and medium-sized 
        manufacturing businesses in the regions they serve.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (c)(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (7) Notwithstanding paragraphs (1), (3), and (5), for fiscal 
year 2011 through fiscal year 2015, the Secretary may not 
provide to a Center more than 50 percent of the costs incurred 
by such Center and may not require that a Center's cost share 
exceed 50 percent.
  (8) Not later than 4 years after the date of enactment of the 
National Institute of Standards and Technology Authorization 
Act of 2010, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on 
the cost share requirements under the program. The report 
shall--
          (A) discuss various cost share structures, including 
        the cost share structure in place prior to such date of 
        enactment and the cost share structure in place under 
        paragraph (7), and the effect of such cost share 
        structures on individual Centers and the overall 
        program; and
          (B) include a recommendation for how best to 
        structure the cost share requirement after fiscal year 
        2015 to provide for the long-term sustainability of the 
        program.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e) MEP Advisory Board.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(4) Federal advisory committee act.--In discharging 
        its duties under this subsection, the MEP Advisory 
        Board shall function solely in an advisory capacity, in 
        accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act.]
          (4) Federal advisory committee act applicability.--
                  (A) In general.--In discharging its duties 
                under this subsection, the MEP Advisory Board 
                shall function solely in an advisory capacity, 
                in accordance with the Federal Advisory 
                Committee Act.
                  (B) Exception.--Section 14 of the Federal 
                Advisory Committee Act shall not apply to the 
                MEP Advisory Board.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (g) Innovative Services Initiative.--
          (1) Establishment.--The Director may establish, 
        within the Centers program under this section, an 
        innovative services initiative to assist small- and 
        medium-sized manufacturers in--
                  (A) reducing their energy usage and 
                environmental waste to improve profitability; 
                and
                  (B) accelerating the domestic 
                commercialization of new product technologies, 
                including components for renewable energy 
                systems.
  (2) Market demand.--The Director may not undertake any 
activity to accelerate the domestic commercialization of a new 
product technology under this subsection unless an analysis of 
market demand for the new product technology has been 
conducted.
  (h) Reports.--
          (1) In general.--In submitting the 3-year 
        programmatic planning document and annual updates under 
        section 23, the Director shall include an assessment of 
        the Director's governance of the program established 
        under this section.
          (2) Criteria.--In conducting such assessment, the 
        Director shall use the criteria established pursuant to 
        the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award under 
        section 17(d)(1)(C) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology 
        Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3711a(d)(1)(C)).
  (i) Definition.--In this section, the term ``community 
college'' means an institution of higher education (as defined 
under section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
U.S.C. 1001(a))) at which the highest degree that is 
predominately awarded to students is an associate's degree.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 28. TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION PROGRAM.

  (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (k) TIP Advisory Board.--
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          [(4) Advisory capacity.--In discharging its duties 
        under this subsection, the TIP Advisory Board shall 
        function solely in an advisory capacity, in accordance 
        with the Federal Advisory Committee Act.]
          (4) Federal advisory committee act applicability.--
                  (A) In general.--In discharging its duties 
                under this subsection, the TIP Advisory Board 
                shall function solely in an advisory capacity, 
                in accordance with the Federal Advisory 
                Committee Act.
                  (B) Exception.--Section 14 of the Federal 
                Advisory Committee Act shall not apply to the 
                TIP Advisory Board.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 34. BIOSCIENCE RESEARCH PROGRAM.

  (a) In General.--The Director shall establish a bioscience 
research program to support research and development of 
standard reference materials, measurements, methods, and 
genomic and other data to advance--
          (1) biological drug research and development;
          (2) molecular diagnostics;
          (3) medical imaging technologies; and
          (4) personalized medicine.
  (b) University Research Centers.--
          (1) Establishment.--The Director may establish 
        research centers at institutions of higher education 
        (in this section referred to as ``university research 
        centers'') through a competitive application process to 
        conduct research that furthers the objectives of the 
        bioscience research program.
          (2) Application.--
                  (A) In general.--An institution of higher 
                education seeking to establish a university 
                research center under this subsection shall 
                submit an application to the Director at such 
                time, in such manner, and containing such 
                information and assurances as the Director may 
                require.
                  (B) Components.--The application shall 
                include, at a minimum, a description of--
                          (i) the relevant research and 
                        instructional capacity of the 
                        applicant;
                          (ii) the research projects that will 
                        be undertaken by the applicant;
                          (iii) the extent to which the 
                        applicant will partner with industry 
                        and the role industry will play in the 
                        research undertaken by the university 
                        research center;
                          (iv) how the applicant will 
                        disseminate research results 
                        effectively; and
                          (v) the metrics that will be used to 
                        evaluate the success of the projects 
                        under clause (ii) and the contribution 
                        of the university research center in 
                        furthering the objectives of the 
                        bioscience research program.
                  (C) Special consideration.--The Director 
                shall give special consideration to an 
                application from an institution of higher 
                education that is--
                          (i) an 1890 Institution, as defined 
                        in section 2 of the Agricultural 
                        Research, Extension, and Education 
                        Reform Act of 1998 (7 U.S.C. 7061);
                          (ii) a Predominantly Black 
                        Institution, as defined in section 318 
                        of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
                        U.S.C. 1059e);
                          (iii) a part B institution, as 
                        defined in section 322 of the Higher 
                        Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1061);
                          (iv) a Tribal College or University, 
                        as defined in section 316 of the Higher 
                        Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
                        1059c);
                          (v) a Native American-serving, 
                        nontribal institution, as defined in 
                        section 319 of the Higher Education Act 
                        of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1059f);
                          (vi) an Asian American and Native 
                        American Pacific Islander-serving 
                        institution, as defined in section 320 
                        of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
                        U.S.C. 1059g);
                          (vii) an Alaska Native-serving 
                        institution, as defined in section 317 
                        of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
                        U.S.C. 1059d);
                          (viii) a Native Hawaiian-serving 
                        institution, as defined in section 317 
                        of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
                        U.S.C. 1059d); or
                          (ix) a Hispanic-serving institution, 
                        as defined in section 502 of the Higher 
                        Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
                        1101a).
          (3) Assessment.--Not later than 3 years after the 
        date on which a university research center is 
        established and every 3 years thereafter, the Director 
        shall evaluate the university research center for its 
        contributions to the bioscience research program.
          (4) Annual meeting.--If the Director establishes more 
        than 1 university research center, the Director shall 
        convene an annual meeting of researchers from all of 
        the university research centers and the Institute to 
        foster collaboration and communication.
  (c) User Facility.--The Director may establish a bioscience 
user facility to provide access to advanced or unique 
equipment, services, materials, and other resources to 
industry, institutions of higher education, nonprofit 
organizations, and government agencies to perform research and 
testing.
  (d) Postdoctoral Fellows.--The Director shall, to the extent 
practicable, assign 1 or more fellows from the postdoctoral 
fellowship program established in section 19 to the bioscience 
research program.
  (e) Programmatic Planning Document.--The Director shall 
ensure that the updates to the programmatic planning document 
transmitted to Congress under section 23(d) include the 
bioscience research program.
  (f) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) Bioscience research program.--The term 
        ``bioscience research program'' means the research and 
        development program authorized under subsection (a).
          (2) Institution of higher education.--The term 
        ``institution of higher education'' has the same 
        meaning given the term in section 101(a) of the Higher 
        Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)).
  Sec. [34.] 35. This Act may be cited as the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology Act.
                              ----------                              


TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


PART III--EMPLOYEES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBPART D--PAY AND ALLOWANCES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


CHAPTER 53--PAY RATES AND SYSTEMS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SUBCHAPTER II--EXECUTIVE SCHEDULE PAY RATES

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 5314. Positions at level III

  Level III of the Executive Schedule applies to the following 
positions, for which the annual rate of basic pay shall be the 
rate determined with respect to such level under chapter 11 of 
title 2, as adjusted by section 5318 of this title:
          Solicitor General of the United States.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and 
        Technology, who also serves as Director of the National 
        Institute of Standards and Technology.
          Associate Attorney General.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 5315. Positions at level IV

  Level IV of the Executive Schedule applies to the following 
positions, for which the annual rate of basic pay shall be the 
rate determined with respect to such level under chapter 11 of 
title 2, as adjusted by section 5318 of this title:
        Deputy Administrator of General Services.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

        [Director, National Institute of Standards and 
        Technology, Department of Commerce.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


STEVENSON-WYDLER TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION ACT OF 1980

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 24. OFFICE OF INNOVATION AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP.

  (a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish an Office of 
Innovation and Entrepreneurship to foster innovation and the 
commercialization of new technologies, products, processes, and 
services with the goal of promoting productivity and economic 
growth in the United States.
  (b) Duties.--The Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship 
shall be responsible for--
          (1) developing and advocating policies to accelerate 
        innovation and advance the commercialization of 
        research and development, including federally funded 
        research and development;
          (2) identifying existing barriers to innovation and 
        commercialization, including access to capital and 
        other resources, and ways to overcome those barriers;
          (3) providing access to relevant data, research, and 
        technical assistance on innovation and 
        commercialization;
          (4) strengthening collaboration on and coordination 
        of policies relating to innovation and 
        commercialization within the Department of Commerce and 
        between the Department of Commerce and other Federal 
        agencies, as appropriate; and
          (5) any other duties as determined by the Secretary.
  (c) Advisory Committee.--The Secretary shall establish an 
Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship to provide 
advice to the Secretary on carrying out subsection (b).

SEC. 25. FEDERAL LOAN GUARANTEES FOR INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES IN 
                    MANUFACTURING.

  (a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a program 
to provide loan guarantees for obligations to small- or medium-
sized manufacturers for the use or production of innovative 
technologies.
  (b) Eligible Projects.--A loan guarantee may be made under 
such program only for a project that reequips, expands, or 
establishes a manufacturing facility in the United States to--
  (1) use an innovative technology or an innovative process in 
manufacturing; or
  (2) manufacture an innovative technology product or an 
integral component of such product.
  (c) Eligible Borrower.--A loan guarantee may be made under 
such program only for a borrower who is a small- or medium-
sized manufacturer, as determined by the Secretary under the 
criteria established pursuant to subsection (m).
  (d) Limitation on Amount.--A loan guarantee shall not exceed 
an amount equal to 80 percent of the obligation, as estimated 
at the time at which the loan guarantee is issued.
  (e) Limitations on Loan Guarantee.--No loan guarantee shall 
be made unless the Secretary determines that--
          (1) there is a reasonable prospect of repayment of 
        the principal and interest on the obligation by the 
        borrower;
          (2) the amount of the obligation (when combined with 
        amounts available to the borrower from other sources) 
        is sufficient to carry out the project;
          (3) the obligation is not subordinate to other 
        financing;
          (4) the obligation bears interest at a rate that does 
        not exceed a level that the Secretary determines 
        appropriate, taking into account the prevailing rate of 
        interest in the private sector for similar loans and 
        risks; and
          (5) the term of an obligation requires full repayment 
        over a period not to exceed the lesser of--
                  (A) 30 years; or
                  (B) 90 percent of the projected useful life, 
                as determined by the Secretary, of the physical 
                asset to be financed by the obligation.
  (f) Defaults.--
          (1) Payment by Secretary.--
                  (A) In general.--If a borrower defaults (as 
                defined in regulations promulgated by the 
                Secretary and specified in the loan guarantee) 
                on the obligation, the holder of the loan 
                guarantee shall have the right to demand 
                payment of the unpaid amount from the 
                Secretary.
                  (B) Payment required.--Within such period as 
                may be specified in the loan guarantee or 
                related agreements, the Secretary shall pay to 
                the holder of the loan guarantee the unpaid 
                interest on and unpaid principal of the 
                obligation as to which the borrower has 
                defaulted, unless the Secretary finds that 
                there was no default by the borrower in the 
                payment of interest or principal or that the 
                default has been remedied.
                  (C) Forbearance.--Nothing in this subsection 
                precludes any forbearance by the holder of the 
                obligation for the benefit of the borrower 
                which may be agreed upon by the parties to the 
                obligation and approved by the Secretary.
          (2) Subrogation.--
                  (A) In general.--If the Secretary makes a 
                payment under paragraph (1), the Secretary 
                shall be subrogated to the rights, as specified 
                in the loan guarantee, of the recipient of the 
                payment or related agreements including, if 
                appropriate, the authority (notwithstanding any 
                other provision of law) to--
                  (i) complete, maintain, operate, lease, or 
                otherwise dispose of any property acquired 
                pursuant to such loan guarantee or related 
                agreement; or
                  (ii) permit the borrower, pursuant to an 
                agreement with the Secretary, to continue to 
                pursue the purposes of the project if the 
                Secretary determines that such an agreement is 
                in the public interest.
                  (B) Superiority of rights.--The rights of the 
                Secretary, with respect to any property 
                acquired pursuant to a loan guarantee or 
                related agreements, shall be superior to the 
                rights of any other person with respect to the 
                property.
          (3) Action by attorney general.--
                  (A) Notification.--If the borrower defaults 
                on an obligation, the Secretary shall notify 
                the Attorney General of the default.
                  (B) Recovery.--On notification, the Attorney 
                General shall take such action as is 
                appropriate to recover the unpaid principal and 
                interest.
  (g) Payment of Principal and Interest by Secretary.--With 
respect to any obligation guaranteed under this section, the 
Secretary may enter into a contract to pay, and pay, holders of 
the obligation for and on behalf of the borrower from funds 
appropriated for that purpose the principal and interest 
payments that become due and payable on the unpaid balance of 
the obligation if the Secretary finds that--
          (1)(A) the borrower is unable to make the payments 
        and is not in default;
          (B) it is in the public interest to permit the 
        borrower to continue to pursue the project; and
          (C) the probable net benefit to the Federal 
        Government in paying the principal and interest will be 
        greater than that which would result in the event of a 
        default;
          (2) the amount of the payment that the Secretary is 
        authorized to pay shall be no greater than the amount 
        of principal and interest that the borrower is 
        obligated to pay under the obligation being guaranteed; 
        and
          (3) the borrower agrees to reimburse the Secretary 
        for the payment (including interest) on terms and 
        conditions that are satisfactory to the Secretary.
  (h) Terms and Conditions.--A loan guarantee under this 
section shall include such detailed terms and conditions as the 
Secretary determines appropriate to--
          (1) protect the interests of the United States in the 
        case of default; and
          (2) have available all the patents and technology 
        necessary for any person selected, including the 
        Secretary, to complete and operate the project.
  (i) Consultation.--In establishing the terms and conditions 
of a loan guarantee under this section, the Secretary shall 
consult with the Secretary of the Treasury.
  (j) Fees.--
          (1) In general.--The Secretary shall charge and 
        collect fees for loan guarantees in amounts the 
        Secretary determines are sufficient to cover applicable 
        administrative expenses.
          (2) Availability.--Fees collected under this 
        subsection shall--
                  (A) be deposited by the Secretary into the 
                Treasury of the United States; and
                  (B) remain available until expended, subject 
                to such other conditions as are contained in 
                annual appropriations Acts.
  (k) Records.--
          (1) In general.--With respect to a loan guarantee 
        under this section, the borrower, the lender, and any 
        other appropriate party shall keep such records and 
        other pertinent documents as the Secretary shall 
        prescribe by regulation, including such records as the 
        Secretary may require to facilitate an effective audit.
          (2) Access.--The Secretary and the Comptroller 
        General of the United States, or their duly authorized 
        representatives, shall have access to records and other 
        pertinent documents for the purpose of conducting an 
        audit.
  (l) Full Faith and Credit.--The full faith and credit of the 
United States is pledged to the payment of all loan guarantees 
issued under this section with respect to principal and 
interest.
  (m) Regulations.--The Secretary shall issue final regulations 
before making any loan guarantees under the program. Such 
regulations shall include--
          (1) criteria that the Secretary shall use to 
        determine eligibility for loan guarantees under this 
        section, including--
                  (A) whether a borrower is a small- or medium-
                sized manufacturer; and
                  (B) whether a borrower demonstrates that a 
                market exists for the innovative technology 
                product, or the integral component of such 
                product, to be manufactured, as evidenced by 
                written statements of interest from potential 
                purchasers;
          (2) policies and procedures for selecting and 
        monitoring lenders and loan performance; and
          (3) any other policies, procedures, or information 
        necessary to implement this section.
  (n) Audit.--
          (1) Annual independent audits.--The Secretary shall 
        enter into an arrangement with an independent auditor 
        for annual evaluations of the program under this 
        section.
          (2) Annual review.--The Comptroller General shall 
        conduct an annual review of the Secretary's execution 
        of the program under this section.
          (3) Report.--The results of the independent audit 
        under paragraph (1) and the Comptroller General's 
        review under paragraph (2) shall be provided directly 
        to the Committee on Science and Technology of the House 
        of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, 
        Science, and Transportation of the Senate.
  (o) Report to Congress.--Concurrent with the submission to 
Congress of the President's annual budget request in each year 
after the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary 
shall transmit to the Committee on Science and Technology of 
the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report containing a 
summary of all activities carried out under this section.
  (p) Coordination and Nonduplication.--To the maximum extent 
practicable, the Secretary shall ensure that the activities 
carried out under this section are coordinated with, and do not 
duplicate the efforts of, other loan guarantee programs within 
the Federal Government.
  (q) MEP Centers.--The Secretary may use centers established 
under section 25 of the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278k) to provide information about 
the program established under this section and to conduct 
outreach to potential borrowers, as appropriate.
  (r) Minimizing Risk.--The Secretary shall promulgate 
regulations and policies to carry out this section in 
accordance with Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-
129, entitled ``Policies for Federal Credit Programs and Non-
Tax Receivables'', as in effect on the date of enactment of 
this section.
  (s) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that no 
loan guarantee shall be made under this section unless the 
borrower agrees to use a federally-approved electronic 
employment eligibility verification system to verify the 
employment eligibility of--
          (1) all persons hired during the contract term by the 
        borrower to perform employment duties within the United 
        States; and
          (2) all persons assigned by the borrower to perform 
        work within the United States on the project.
  (t) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) Cost.--The term ``cost'' has the meaning given 
        such term under section 502 of the Federal Credit 
        Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 661a).
          (2) Innovative process.--The term ``innovative 
        process'' means a process that is significantly 
        improved as compared to the process in general use in 
        the commercial marketplace in the United States at the 
        time the loan guarantee is issued.
          (3) Innovative technology.--The term ``innovative 
        technology'' means a technology that is significantly 
        improved as compared to the technology in general use 
        in the commercial marketplace in the United States at 
        the time the loan guarantee is issued.
          (4) Loan guarantee.--The term ``loan guarantee'' has 
        the meaning given such term in section 502 of the 
        Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 661a). The 
        term includes a loan guarantee commitment (as defined 
        in section 502 of such Act (2 U.S.C. 661a)).
          (5) Obligation.--The term ``obligation'' means the 
        loan or other debt obligation that is guaranteed under 
        this section.
          (6) Program.--The term ``program'' means the loan 
        guarantee program established in subsection (a).
  (u) Authorization of Appropriations.--
          (1) Cost of loan guarantees.--There are authorized to 
        be appropriated $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 
        2011 through 2015 to provide the cost of loan 
        guarantees under this section.
          (2) Principal and interest.--There are authorized to 
        be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out 
        subsection (g).

SEC. 26. REGIONAL INNOVATION PROGRAM.

  (a) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a regional 
innovation program to encourage and support the development of 
regional innovation strategies, including regional innovation 
clusters.
  (b) Regional Innovation Cluster Grants.--
          (1) In general.--As part of the program established 
        under subsection (a), the Secretary may award grants on 
        a competitive basis to eligible recipients for 
        activities relating to the formation and development of 
        regional innovation clusters.
          (2) Permissible activities.--Grants awarded under 
        this subsection may be used for activities determined 
        appropriate by the Secretary, including the following:
                  (A) Feasibility studies.
                  (B) Planning activities.
                  (C) Technical assistance.
                  (D) Developing or strengthening communication 
                and collaboration between and among 
                participants of a regional innovation cluster.
                  (E) Attracting additional participants to a 
                regional innovation cluster.
                  (F) Facilitating market development of 
                products and services developed by a regional 
                innovation cluster, including through 
                demonstration, deployment, technology transfer, 
                and commercialization activities.
                  (G) Developing relationships between a 
                regional innovation cluster and entities or 
                clusters in other regions.
          (3) Eligible recipient.--For purposes of this 
        subsection, the term ``eligible recipient'' means any 
        of the following:
                  (A) A State.
                  (B) An Indian tribe.
                  (C) A city or other political subdivision of 
                a State.
                  (D) An entity that--
                          (i) is a nonprofit organization, an 
                        institution of higher education, a 
                        public-private partnership, or an 
                        economic development organization or 
                        similar entity; and
                          (ii) has an application that is 
                        supported by a State or a political 
                        subdivision of a State.
                  (E) A consortium of any of the entities 
                listed in subparagraphs (A) through (D).
          (4) Application.--
                  (A) In general.--An eligible recipient shall 
                submit an application to the Secretary at such 
                time, in such manner, and containing such 
                information and assurances as the Secretary may 
                require.
                  (B) Components.--The application shall 
                include, at a minimum, a description of the 
                regional innovation cluster supported by the 
                proposed activity, including a description of 
                the following:
                          (i) Whether the regional innovation 
                        cluster is supported by the private 
                        sector, State and local governments, 
                        and other relevant stakeholders.
                          (ii) How the existing participants in 
                        the regional innovation cluster will 
                        encourage and solicit participation by 
                        all types of entities that might 
                        benefit from participation, including 
                        newly formed entities and those rival 
                        to existing participants.
                          (iii) The extent to which the 
                        regional innovation cluster is likely 
                        to stimulate innovation and have a 
                        positive impact on regional economic 
                        growth and development.
                          (iv) Whether the participants in the 
                        regional innovation cluster have access 
                        to, or contribute to, a well-trained 
                        workforce.
                          (v) Whether the participants in the 
                        regional innovation cluster are capable 
                        of attracting additional funds from 
                        non-Federal sources.
                          (vi) The likelihood that the 
                        participants in the regional innovation 
                        cluster will be able to sustain 
                        activities once grant funds under this 
                        subsection have been expended.
          (5) Cost share.--The Secretary may not provide more 
        than 50 percent of the total cost of any activity 
        funded under this subsection.
          (6) Use and application of research and information 
        program.--To the maximum extent practicable, the 
        Secretary shall ensure that activities funded under 
        this subsection use and apply any relevant research, 
        best practices, and metrics developed under the program 
        established in subsection (c).
  (c) Regional Innovation Research and Information Program.--
          (1) In general.--As part of the program established 
        under subsection (a), the Secretary shall establish a 
        regional innovation research and information program 
        to--
                  (A) gather, analyze, and disseminate 
                information on best practices for regional 
                innovation strategies (including regional 
                innovation clusters), including information 
                relating to how innovation, productivity, and 
                economic development can be maximized through 
                such strategies;
                  (B) provide technical assistance, including 
                through the development of technical assistance 
                guides, for the development and implementation 
                of regional innovation strategies (including 
                regional innovation clusters);
                  (C) support the development of relevant 
                metrics and measurement standards to evaluate 
                regional innovation strategies (including 
                regional innovation clusters), including the 
                extent to which such strategies stimulate 
                innovation, productivity, and economic 
                development; and
                  (D) collect and make available data on 
                regional innovation cluster activity in the 
                United States, including data on--
                          (i) the size, specialization, and 
                        competitiveness of regional innovation 
                        clusters;
                          (ii) the regional domestic product 
                        contribution, total jobs and earnings 
                        by key occupations, establishment size, 
                        nature of specialization, patents, 
                        Federal research and development 
                        spending, and other relevant 
                        information for regional innovation 
                        clusters; and
                          (iii) supply chain product and 
                        service flows within and between 
                        regional innovation clusters.
          (2) Research grants.--The Secretary may award 
        research grants on a competitive basis to support and 
        further the goals of the program established under this 
        subsection.
          (3) Dissemination of information.--Data and analysis 
        compiled by the Secretary under the program established 
        in this subsection shall be made available to other 
        Federal agencies, State and local governments, and 
        nonprofit and for-profit entities.
          (4) Cluster grant program.--The Secretary shall 
        incorporate data and analysis relating to any regional 
        innovation cluster supported by a grant under 
        subsection (b) into the program established under this 
        subsection.
  (d) Interagency Coordination.--
          (1) In general.--To the maximum extent practicable, 
        the Secretary shall ensure that the activities carried 
        out under this section are coordinated with, and do not 
        duplicate the efforts of, other programs at the 
        Department of Commerce or other Federal agencies.
          (2) Collaboration.--The Secretary shall explore and 
        pursue collaboration with other Federal agencies, 
        including through multiagency funding opportunities, on 
        regional innovation strategies.
  (e) Evaluation.--
          (1) In general.--Not later than 4 years after the 
        date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall 
        enter into a contract with an independent entity, such 
        as the National Academy of Sciences, to conduct an 
        evaluation of the program established under subsection 
        (a).
          (2) Requirements.--The evaluation shall include--
                  (A) whether such program is achieving its 
                goals;
                  (B) any recommendations for how such program 
                may be improved; and
                  (C) a recommendation as to whether such 
                program should be continued or terminated.
  (f) Regional Innovation Cluster Defined.--The term ``regional 
innovation cluster'' means a geographically bounded network of 
similar, synergistic, or complementary entities that--
          (1) are engaged in or with a particular industry 
        sector;
          (2) have active channels for business transactions 
        and communication;
          (3) share specialized infrastructure, labor markets, 
        and services; and
          (4) leverage the region's unique competitive 
        strengths to stimulate innovation and create jobs.
  (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to 
be appropriated such sums as are necessary for each of fiscal 
years 2011 through 2015 to carry out this section, including 
such sums as are necessary to carry out the evaluation required 
under subsection (e).
                              ----------                              


ENERGY POLICY ACT OF 2005

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


TITLE IX--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Subtitle G--Science

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


[SEC. 977. SYSTEMS BIOLOGY PROGRAM.

  [(a) Program.--
          [(1) Establishment.--The Secretary shall establish a 
        research, development, and demonstration program in 
        microbial and plant systems biology, protein science, 
        computational biology, and environmental science to 
        support the energy, national security, and 
        environmental missions of the Department.
          [(2) Grants.--The program shall support individual 
        researchers and multidisciplinary teams of researchers 
        through competitive, merit-reviewed grants.
          [(3) Consultation.--In carrying out the program, the 
        Secretary shall consult with other Federal agencies 
        that conduct genetic and protein research.
  [(b) Goals.--The program shall have the goal of developing 
technologies and methods based on the biological functions of 
genomes, microbes, and plants that--
          [(1) can facilitate the production of fuels, 
        including hydrogen in sustainable production systems 
        that reduce greenhouse gas emissions;
          [(2) convert carbon dioxide to organic carbon;
          [(3) detoxify soils and water, including at 
        facilities of the Department, contaminated with heavy 
        metals and radiological materials;
          [(4) develop cellulosic and other feedstocks that are 
        less resource and land intensive and that promote 
        sustainable use of resources, including soil, water, 
        energy, forests, and land, and ensure protection of 
        air, water, and soil quality; and
          [(5) address other Department missions as identified 
        by the Secretary.
  [(c) Plan.--
          [(1) Development of plan.--Not later than 1 year 
        after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
        shall prepare and transmit to Congress a research plan 
        describing how the program authorized pursuant to this 
        section will be undertaken to accomplish the program 
        goals established in subsection (b).
          [(2) Review of plan.--The Secretary shall contract 
        with the National Academy of Sciences to review the 
        research plan developed under this subsection. The 
        Secretary shall transmit the review to Congress not 
        later than 18 months after transmittal of the research 
        plan under paragraph (1), along with the Secretary's 
        response to the recommendations contained in the 
        review.
  [(d) User Facilities and Ancillary Equipment.--Within the 
funds authorized to be appropriated pursuant to this subtitle, 
amounts shall be available for projects to develop, plan, 
construct, acquire, or operate special equipment, 
instrumentation, or facilities, including user facilities at 
National Laboratories, for researchers conducting research, 
development, demonstration, and commercial application in 
systems biology and proteomics and associated biological 
disciplines.
  [(e) Prohibition on Biomedical and Human Cell and Human 
Subject Research.--
          [(1) No biomedical research.--In carrying out the 
        program under this section, the Secretary shall not 
        conduct biomedical research.
          [(2) Limitations.--Nothing in this section shall 
        authorize the Secretary to conduct any research or 
        demonstrations--
                  [(A) on human cells or human subjects; or
                  [(B) designed to have direct application with 
                respect to human cells or human subjects.
  [(f) Bioenergy Research Centers.--
          [(1) Establishment of centers.--In carrying out the 
        program under subsection (a), the Secretary shall 
        establish at least 7 bioenergy research centers, which 
        may be of varying size.
          [(2) Geographic distribution.--The Secretary shall 
        establish at least 1 bioenergy research center in each 
        Petroleum Administration for Defense District or 
        Subdistrict of a Petroleum Administration for Defense 
        District.
          [(3) Goals.--The goals of the centers established 
        under this subsection shall be to accelerate basic 
        transformational research and development of biofuels, 
        including biological processes.
          [(4) Selection and duration.--
                  [(A) In general.--A center under this 
                subsection shall be selected on a competitive 
                basis for a period of 5 years.
                  [(B) Reapplication.--After the end of the 
                period described in subparagraph (A), a grantee 
                may reapply for selection on a competitive 
                basis.
          [(5) Inclusion.--A center that is in existence on the 
        date of enactment of this subsection--
                  [(A) shall be counted towards the requirement 
                for establishment of at least 7 bioenergy 
                research centers; and
                  [(B) may continue to receive support for a 
                period of 5 years beginning on the date of 
                establishment of the center.]

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                     XX. Committee Recommendations

    On April 28, 2010, the Committee on Science and Technology 
favorably reported H.R. 5116 by a recorded vote of 29-8 and 
recommended its enactment.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>


                   XXII. Additional/Dissenting Views

   DISSENTING VIEWS OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVES: RALPH M. HALL, LAMAR 
 SMITH, FRANK D. LUCAS, TODD AKIN, MARIO DIAZ-BALART, ADRIAN SMITH AND 
                               PETE OLSON

    Signed into law by President George W. Bush in August 2007, 
the original America COMPETES Act was developed and passed with 
bipartisan support in response to consensus recommendations by 
the business and academic communities regarding the most 
important steps the Nation could take to enhance long-term 
economic competitiveness through investments in science and 
technology.
    We continue to support this organizing principle of the 
America COMPETES Act, as well as its underlying recommendations 
to prioritize and strengthen investments in basic research and 
development and science, technology, engineering, and 
mathematics (STEM) education. These policies, together with a 
broader economic policy that includes lower taxes, adherence to 
market principles, streamlined Federal regulation, and 
attendance to the budget deficit and national debt, form the 
policy basis of what is necessary for the country to truly 
remain competitive into the future.
    Accordingly, we strongly support many of the programs and 
activities called for in H.R. 5116, the America COMPETES 
Reauthorization Act of 2010, and commend Chairman Gordon for 
his leadership on this important topic. However, we remain 
concerned due to fundamental objections with the legislation, 
including excessive spending levels, creation of numerous new 
unnecessary or duplicative programs, and a policy shift away 
from the focus on innovation-enabling basic research that 
formed the cornerstone of the original America COMPETES Act and 
the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report 
from which it evolved.
    Specifically, our overriding objections include the 
following:
    
 Overall authorization levels of nearly $84 
billion--$20 billion in new funding above the fiscal year 2010 
base, and almost $6 billion above the ten-year doubling path 
for the National Science Foundation, Department of Energy 
Office of Science, and National Institute of Standards and 
Technology.
    
 Increased authorization length from three to five 
years, limiting Committee oversight opportunities and calling 
for extensive out-year funding increases without regard to the 
current and future fiscal situations.
    
 Creation of at least seven new programs, several 
of which fund activities well beyond research and development, 
many of which are duplicative or unnecessary, and all of which 
will dilute funding available for priority basic research.
    During the full committee markup of the legislation, 
Republicans offered 39 amendments, most aimed to address 
concerns in the aforementioned areas. While some amendments 
were accepted and allowed for improvement to the legislation, 
those addressing the fundamental concerns of reducing the 
authorization levels, eliminating new programs, and 
``righting'' policy shifts in the bill were squarely and 
repeatedly rejected. For these reasons, we are unable to 
support the bill as reported by the full committee.
    We remain committed to authorizing America COMPETES through 
targeted legislation that takes into full account the current 
fiscal situation and outlook, and will continue to work to 
improve the bill as it moves to the House floor and through the 
legislative process.

              NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION & STEM EDUCATION

    We remain committed to a robust authorization for basic 
research and education at the National Science Foundation 
(NSF). From a policy perspective, we are pleased to see the 
focus at NSF remain on basic research, however the addition of 
a new innovative prize program could signal an emphasis on 
applied research which is an area correctly not included in 
NSF's mission. The elimination of a broad range of schools at 
which teachers are permitted to use their Noyce Scholarship 
experience is disappointing, despite efforts to put in place 
incentives for them to teach in ``high needs'' schools. We 
support the goal that all American students should reap the 
benefits of these highly skilled teachers. We are not 
supportive of continuing unfunded programs in this legislation 
like the Partnership for Access to Science Laboratories pilot 
program.
    As expressed during the original COMPETES authorization in 
2007, we acknowledge a need for a STEM education program at the 
Department of Energy (DOE), however, multiple programs that go 
beyond the purpose of educating and training DOE's future 
workforce is unwarranted.

             NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY

    A reorganization of the laboratories at the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) requires proper 
oversight to ensure it is beneficial to the needs of the 
Nation. For that reason we echo our desire to shorten the 
authorization period for the legislation to three years. We 
believe the elevation of the Director of NIST to an Under 
Secretary position will provide NIST with more recognition 
within the Department of Commerce.
    We maintain that including biosciences as an area of 
emphasis for NIST under this legislation is unnecessary as NIST 
already has the authority and is conducting such research. 
Driving NIST to create university research centers and a new 
user facility at this time forces the Director to utilize funds 
in an inefficient and redundant manner.

                               INNOVATION

    While we are steadfast in our support of a robust base of 
innovation and manufacturing in the United States, we remain 
concerned with the language in the legislation creating 
programs for manufacturing loan guarantees and regional 
innovation centers at the Department of Commerce. Both of these 
programs call for funding new activities well beyond research 
and development. Given budget realities, new funding for these 
programs will effectively dilute funding available for priority 
research activities at the Department of Commerce--primarily 
those at NIST. Further, the eligible activities and entities in 
both programs are vaguely defined, and thus particularly 
vulnerable to potentially inappropriate or duplicative 
activities. While attempts by Republicans to strike these 
programs were rejected, we are pleased that some efforts to 
incorporate additional taxpayer protections were accepted, such 
as the adoption of an amendment requiring that the loan 
guarantee eligibility criteria include proof that a market 
exists for the product for which the loan guarantee is being 
requested, and an amendment to ensure the Department of 
Commerce develop the program in accordance with existing Office 
of Management and Budget guidelines.

                          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

    In 2007, we expressed concern over the establishment of the 
Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA-E), arguing that the 
creation of such an agency modeled on the Department of Defense 
DARPA program would not translate effectively to the energy 
sector and had the potential to create an unnecessary 
bureaucracy at the Department of Energy. We recognize the 
benefit that ``creative, out of the box, transformational 
research'' may provide to the country; however, we find 
language in the current legislation repealing certain statutory 
protections limiting the breadth and scope of the APRA-E 
organization troubling. The elimination of a ceiling on the 
number of employees the Director of ARPA-E may hire, coupled 
with the desire to fashion an independent staff of legal 
counsel, contracting specialists, and program directors in our 
interpretation moves ARPA-E in the direction of a new 
Department and not a nimble, targeted, responsive program.
    Further, we are concerned that the new ``Energy Innovation 
Hubs'' program created by the legislation is unnecessary and 
will be significantly redundant with existing activities 
throughout the Department. In the case of the Office of 
Science, this will result in a disconcerting policy shift away 
from the longstanding focus of the Office on priority basic 
research in the energy sciences and toward more applied 
research and technology development.

                                   Ralph M. Hall.
                                   Lamar Smith.
                                   Frank D. Lucas.
                                   W. Todd Akin.
                                   Mario Diaz-Balart.
                                   Pete Olson.
                                   Adrian Smith.

 ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF REPRESENTATIVES INGLIS, McCAUL, BARTLETT, EHLERS, 
                          BIGGERT, AND BILBRAY

    We support the COMPETES Reauthorization Act as a continued 
commitment to long-term economic competitiveness and strong 
science and technology programs in U.S. government, academia, 
and industry, and we cheer Chairman Gordon and Ranking Member 
Hall for their leadership in this effort. The National 
Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report provided 
several recommendations about increasing and targeting 
investments in research and development and education that 
formed the core of COMPETES in 2007. As we reauthorize this 
landmark legislation, it is important to again evaluate and 
prioritize our investments.

                             BASIC RESEARCH

    Several provisions associated with the National Science 
Foundation (NSF) and the Office of Science at the Department of 
Energy (DOE) indicate a substantial shift away from 
foundational, long-term research. In a commendable push to 
bring more research and development breakthroughs to the 
consumer market more quickly, we feel that this legislation may 
draw resources and attention away from the basic research work 
that will sustain American competitiveness over the long term. 
The Committee should try to more clearly balance an obvious 
short term desire for a burst of technological innovation with 
a reliable supply of emerging scientific breakthroughs that 
fuel our economic engine. We are troubled that the current 
Administration may be losing sight of the necessity to continue 
to fuel the pipeline of innovation with basic research.

                              NEW PROGRAMS

    In the 2010 COMPETES Reauthorization, the majority has 
created a number of new programs intended to accelerate and 
bring to market technological progress. The Energy Innovation 
Hubs at the DOE may certainly improve collaboration in key 
areas of inquiry, and may lay the groundwork for U.S. 
leadership in new energy technologies. Still, as currently 
conceived, the Hubs would replicate some of the work already 
ongoing at the Department and result in duplicative efforts. 
This reauthorization also adds a bioscience research program at 
the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST). It 
seems that this language is redundant with ongoing work at NIST 
and will drive redundant and inefficient investments in this 
program and accompanying university research centers. We cannot 
support the creation of new programs that will build redundancy 
into the missions of these critical agencies and cause 
excessive inefficiency in research investments. Adding 
duplication to federal efforts is counter to the intention of 
the COMPETES reauthorization.

                            INNOVATION TITLE

    The 2010 COMPETES Reauthorization includes a new title 
which purports to accelerate innovation. We are troubled that 
this title strays from the original recommendations of the 
Rising Above the Gathering Storm report to improve our 
competitiveness. While a federal loan guarantee program and 
regional innovation program may not be bad ideas, they are not 
affiliated with the report's recommendations and these new 
programs could have used a more thorough vetting process before 
our Committee.

                      CLIMATE RESEARCH PROVISIONS

    We value and depend on accurate assessments of the behavior 
of and changes to our climate, and we acknowledge DOE's work in 
this area. However, we question the necessity or utility of 
including climate research provisions at the DOE Office of 
Science Biological and Environmental Research Program in this 
reauthorization. Inclusion of climate research programs 
confuses the intent of this bill and improperly emphasizes the 
importance of climate science in our roadmap to a powerfully 
competitive economy.

                          AUTHORIZATION LEVELS

    The Rising Above the Gathering Storm report contained 
specific recommendations to increase and target funding for 
some of our most important research programs. Increasing the 
resources available to these programs, and to our national 
labs, academic institutions, and research partnerships in 
pursuit of foundational, transformative breakthroughs is an 
important part of our plan for economic competitiveness. We 
hope that while we grapple with a struggling economy, we 
balance our enthusiasm for these programs with sensible fiscal 
restraint. In this fiscal environment, we hope these 
authorization levels convey that importance we place on 
scientific and technical progress for the success of the U.S. 
on an international stage.

                                   Bob Inglis.
                                   Brian P. Bilbray.
                                   Michael T. McCaul.
                                   Judy Biggert.
                                   Vernon J. Ehlers.
                                   Roscoe G. Bartlett.

         DISSENTING VIEWS OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE ROHRABACHER

    The theoretical purpose of the America COMPETES Act is to 
enhance long-term economic competitiveness through investments 
in science and technology. I support this laudable goal, as I 
have for more than 21 years as a member of the Committee on 
Science and Technology, including 10 years as a Subcommittee 
Chairman. But I cannot support this legislation which, simply 
put, authorizes too much funding in too many wrong-headed ways.
    While I'm certain this bill was drafted with the best 
intentions and motiviations, I agree with many of the 
Dissenting Views as stated by Ranking Member Hall and others, 
specifically that:

        . . . [national investments] in basic reseach and 
        development and science, technology, engineering, and 
        mathematics (STEM) education . . . together with a 
        broader economic policy that includes lower taxes, 
        adherence to market principles, streamlined Federal 
        regulation, and attendance to the budget deficit and 
        national debt, form the policy basis of what is 
        necessary for the country to truly remain competitive 
        into the future.

    But this point must be stated clearly and forcefully: we 
cannot enchance our long-term competitiveness by mortgaging the 
future of our children and grandchildren.
    That is precisely what this legislation does by authorizing 
$84 billion, a 31% increase above the FY 2010 baseline. That 
increase must add to our deficit--money we are borrowing from 
China and other foreign nations. There is no sense of 
prioritization, and no attempt at increasing efficiencies or at 
restructuring programs that would be expected in a 
reauthorization bill of this size and complexity. This 
legislation just adds new spending on top of old.
    At the same time, the Majority refused to accept common-
sense amendments to increase revenue through ownership rights 
and technology developed with government funds and to make 
certain that these funds don't go overseas to foreign 
competitors. If we finance foreign researchers who return home 
with their new-found results, then we should rename this the 
America DEPLETES Act.
    Creating new federal programs should always be done with 
caution and oversight. Establishing them in a time of economic 
downturn by increasing deficit spending will reduce 
productivity and economic activity. This legislation creates 
many new programs which are unnecessary and wasteful, 
increasing deficits while reducing the advancement 
opportunities for our nation.
    Spending more, borrowing more, taxing more, and running up 
the deficit at a record pace over the past year have not helped 
grow the economy or reverse the economic outlook for America. I 
had hoped that the Majority would change course and begin to 
work in a responsible way to promote job creation and economic 
growth in both the near-term and long-term. This legislation 
shows how much that hope was misplaced.
                                   Dana Rohrabacher.

         DISSENTING VIEWS OFFERED BY REPRESENTATIVE PAUL BROUN

    The Reauthorization calls for excessive spending levels, 
the creation of numerous new unnecessary or duplicative 
programs, and a policy shift away from the focus on innovation-
enabling basic research that formed the cornerstone of the 
original America COMPETES Act of 2007 and the National 
Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report from which 
it evolved.
    Specifically, I have three main concerns. First, the 
overall authorization levels approach $84 billion, which 
represents $20 billion in new funding above the fiscal year 
2010 base, and almost $6 billion above the ten-year doubling 
path for the National Science Foundation, Department of Energy 
Office of Science, and National Institute of Standards and 
Technology. Secondly, increasing the out year funding and the 
authorization length from three to five years limits the 
Committee's oversight opportunities without regard to the 
current and future fiscal situations. Lastly, the creation of 
at least seven new programs, which fund activities well beyond 
research and development and are duplicative, will dilute 
funding available for priority basic research.
    During the full committee markup of the legislation, my 
Republican colleagues and I offered 39 amendments, mostly 
addressing concerns in the aforementioned areas. While some 
amendments were accepted and allowed for improvement to the 
legislation, those addressing the fundamental concerns of 
reducing the authorization levels, eliminating new programs, 
and ``righting'' policy shifts in the bill were repeatedly 
rejected. For those reasons, I am unable to support the bill as 
reported by the full committee.

                                   Paul C. Broun.


  XXIII. PROCEEDINGS OF THE MARKUP BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND 
ENVIRONMENT ON COMMITTEE PRINT, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY OFFICE OF SCIENCE 
  AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2010; ARPA-E REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2010; AND 
            ENERGY INNOVATION HUBS AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2010

                              ----------                              


                        THURSDAY, MARCH 25, 2010

                  House of Representatives,
            Subcommittee on Energy and Environment,
                       Committee on Science and Technology,
                                                    Washington, DC.

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:06 a.m., in 
Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Brian 
Baird [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
    Chairman Baird. Good morning. This hearing will come to 
order pursuant to notice. The Subcommittee on Energy and 
Environment meets to consider the following measure, the 
Committee Print for the Department of Energy. I recognize 
myself for an opening statement.
    I want to welcome everyone to today's Energy and 
Environment Subcommittee markup. It is the first of three 
Subcommittee markups, leading to Full Committee consideration 
of the reauthorization of the America COMPETES Act. Today we 
have before us a Committee Print comprised of three titles. The 
intention is for these three titles to make up the bulk of the 
Department of Energy's research program in America COMPETES.
    Title I is a comprehensive authorization of the 
Department's Office of Science. This is language from H.R. 
4905, a bill I introduced with my colleague from Illinois and 
long-time champion of the Office of Science and the National 
Laboratories, Ms. Biggert, and I thank her for her input and 
collaboration on this.
    The Office of Science is the single largest supporter of 
basic research in the physical sciences in the United States 
with a current budget of roughly $5 billion. It is one of three 
agencies that the America COMPETES Act set on a doubling path 
following on the recommendation of the National Academy's 
report, Rising Above the Gathering Storm. It has a diverse 
portfolio of advanced R&D facilities, including everything from 
supercomputers to x-ray light sources. Last year these 
facilities were used by more than 22,000 researchers from 
universities, national laboratories, private industry, and 
other federal science agencies, enabling our Nation's best and 
brightest to examine new materials for a wide range of 
industrial energy research applications.
    If adopted, this legislation will provide the first 
comprehensive authorization of the Office of Science and will 
keep it on the funding path set forth in the first COMPETES 
Act.
    Title II of the print is the reauthorization of the 
Advanced Research Projects Agency for Energy, or ARPA-E, which 
mirrors the language from H.R. 4906, introduced by the 
Committee Chairman, Mr. Gordon. I, again, commend him for his 
leadership in what I personally believe will be one of the 
landmark achievements of this committee for many years to come.
    In addition to extending the authorizations, Mr. Gordon 
makes a handful of important additions to the underlying 
statute to further ensure it remains the independent and agile 
program it was intended to be. ARPA-E received its first 
appropriation last year, and thanks to the efforts of Dr. 
Majumdar and his all-star staff the program hit the ground 
running and funded over 37 energy research projects. We expect 
to see continuing great things from this program and having 
participated in their summit just a couple of weeks ago, it is 
a strikingly positive development on this front.
    Title III follows H.R. 4907, introduced by Mr. Carnahan, 
Ms. Giffords, and Mr. Tonko, in authorizing the new Energy 
Innovation Hubs as proposed by Energy Secretary Chu in 2009. 
Modeled largely after Bell Labs and the Bioenergy Research 
Centers, the Hubs are intended to foster a highly-collaborative 
working environment that brings together many fields of 
expertise to overcome scientific barriers to our Nation's most 
critical energy challenges.
    Spanning the full gamut from the most basic research all 
the way to commercial applications, these three programs 
represent the forefront of our Nation's effort to lead the 
world in the development and production of technologies for a 
clean energy economy.
    I also want to emphasize that the language in this 
legislation is the result of multiple hearings on all of the 
key fronts, and we have, if anyone is interested, a listing of 
all the many hearings we have held in anticipation of this 
legislation and a direct point-by-point analysis of where the 
outcome and input from those hearings is reflected in the bill.
    I understand that many colleagues, several colleagues have 
a number of amendments, and I look forward to a healthy 
discussion, but also I hope we will move with some alacrity as 
we move forward with this legislation.
    With that I turn it over to my colleague and friend from 
South Carolina, Mr. Inglis, for his opening statement.
    [The prepared statement of Chairman Baird follows:]
               Prepared Statement of Chairman Brian Baird
    Good Morning. I Want to welcome everyone to today's Energy & 
Environment Subcommittee Markup. This is the first of three 
Subcommittee markups leading to the Full Committee's consideration of 
the reauthorization of the America COMPETES Act.
    Today we have before us a Committee Print comprised of three 
titles. The intention is for these three titles to make up the bulk of 
the Department of Energy's research programs in COMPETES.
    Title I is a comprehensive reauthorization of the Department's 
Office of Science. This is the language from H.R. 4905, a bill that I 
introduced with my colleague from Illinois and a long-time champion of 
the Office of Science and the National Laboratories, Ms. Judy Biggert.
    The Office of Science is the single largest supporter of basic 
research in the physical sciences in the United States, with a current 
budget of roughly $5 billion. It is one of three agencies that the 
America COMPETES Act set on a doubling path following on the 
recommendations of the National Academies report, ``Rising Above the 
Gathering Storm.''
    It has a diverse portfolio of advanced R&D facilities, including 
everything from supercomputers to x-ray light sources, Last year, these 
facilities were used by more than 22,000 researchers from universities, 
national laboratories, private industry, and other Federal science 
agencies--enabling our nation's best and brightest to examine new 
materials for a wide range of industrial and energy research 
applications.
    This title authorizes some of the most significant research 
activities of the Office of Science. If adopted, it will provide the 
first comprehensive authorization of the Office of Science, and will 
keep it on the funding path set forth in the first COMPETES Act.
    Title II of the Print is a reauthorization of the Advanced Research 
Projects Agency--Energy, or ARPA-E, which mirrors the language from 
H.R. 4906 introduced by Chairman Gordon. In addition to extending the 
authorizations, Mr. Gordon makes a handful of important additions to 
the underlying statute to further ensure it remains the independent and 
agile program it was intended to be.
    ARPA-E received its first appropriation last year and, thanks to 
the efforts of Dr. Majumdar and his all star staff, the program hit the 
ground running and funded over 37 energy research projects. We expect 
to see great things from this program.
    Title III follows H.R. 4907, introduced by Mr. Carnahan, Ms. 
Giffords, and Mr. Tonko, in authorizing the new Energy Innovation Hubs 
as proposed by Department of Energy Secretary Chu in 2009. Modeled 
largely after Bell Laboratories and the Bioenergy Research Centers, the 
Hubs are intended to foster a highly collaborative working environment 
that brings together many fields of expertise to overcome scientific 
barriers to our nation's most critical energy challenges.
    Spanning the full gambit from the most basic research all the way 
to commercial applications, these three programs represent the 
forefront of our nation's effort to lead the world in the development 
and production of technologies for a clean energy economy.
    I understand my colleagues have a number of amendments, and I look 
forward to a healthy discussion as we move forward with this 
legislation.
    With that I will turn it over to my colleague from South Carolina, 
Mr. Inglis, for his opening statement.

    Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for 
holding this markup as we get ready to reauthorize the America 
COMPETES Act. Today we will look at three components of that 
effort at the Department of Energy, the Office of Science, 
ARPA-E, and the new Energy Innovation Hubs Initiative.
    The Office of Science at DOE has a long history of 
transformative foundational research work that underpins our 
understanding of nature and opens the door to major 
advancements in energy technologies and national security. In 
support of this mission this committee laid out a doubling 
track for the Office of Science in the 2007, Authorization of 
America COMPETES. As we again address this critical office, I 
hope to raise a few points of concern.
    First, it seems we are encouraging the Office of Science to 
move away from its foundational research focus and towards the 
development of marketable technologies. I am concerned that an 
emphasis on technology development will overrun and diminish 
the critical basic discovery science mission.
    Second, this Committee Print places considerable emphasis 
on climate observations and modeling. While this work will 
support strong energy policy decisions, it has little bearing 
on the technological competitiveness of the United States and 
seems misplaced in this COMPETES legislation.
    Next, we will turn to ARPA-E. I am a big believer in this 
new program and the flexible, aggressive approach it takes to 
developing market-ready, transformative technologies. The early 
success of ARPA-E grant solicitations was very encouraging, and 
I can appreciate the enthusiasm behind the 10-year 
authorization for this program as included in the language.
    At the same time I think it is important that we give the 
program more time to show its successes and limitation and 
hesitate to offer it such a lengthy authorization.
    Finally, this language includes Energy Innovation Hubs. 
This is a new initiative recommended by Secretary Chu and is 
intended to create breakthroughs in particularly troublesome 
areas of energy technology.
    I hope to ask a few clarifying questions about this section 
during the hearing. Before we begin, I want to raise my concern 
that this program may duplicate ongoing work at DOE.
    Mr. Chairman, I look forward--as I look at the 
authorization bills, authorization levels in this bill, I can't 
help but think that we are letting our enthusiasm for these 
programs get the better of us. While robust funding for 
critical work at the Department of Energy is necessary and a 
long-term commitment of this subcommittee, now is certainly the 
time to exercise fiscal restraint and fiscal responsibility.
    Again, I want to thank you for holding this markup. I look 
forward to working with you on legislation, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
    Chairman Baird. I thank the gentleman. Does anyone else 
wish to be recognized?
    The Chairman, Mr. Gordon, is recognized for five minutes.
    Mr. Gordon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me say first that 
Mr. Inglis raises some very valid questions, and I think we 
will have a good discussion on that. I won't take time to do 
that now.
    What I would like to do is thank the Members of this 
committee and the staff that have worked so hard in a 
bipartisan way with so many hearings. This is a very, very 
important piece of legislation on its own and will help America 
in terms of our energy independence, in terms of our 
competitiveness, and I think in what can be a real export 
market for us.
    But it is also a major portion of the America COMPETES Act, 
which we will be dealing with later. Let me--and also I want to 
acknowledge, I don't know if mistake is the right term, we will 
call it whatever, the--we have a responsibility to get the 
questions from the Members to the panelists for responses, 
those questions that could not be raised during the hearing. It 
was an error on our part in not forwarding those. It is not--
all you got to do is just push the button and send them on 
over. So they are out. They have not had time to get back, but 
they will be back well before we do the final markup, and I 
want to acknowledge to those folks that had questions that, 
again, that mistake was made, we are in the process of 
correcting it, and they will have plenty of time to review it 
before the full hearing.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Baird. I thank the Chair. Anyone else wish to be 
recognized?
    Chairman Baird. If not, then I ask unanimous consent that 
the print is considered as read and open to amendment at any 
point.
    Chairman Baird. Let the Members proceed with the amendments 
in the order of the roster.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    The first amendment on the roster is a manager's amendment 
offered by the Chair. The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 002, amendment to the Committee 
Print offered by Mr. Baird of Washington.
    Chairman Baird. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 
the reading.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I recognize myself for five minutes to explain the 
amendment.
    The manager's amendment makes a series of changes 
throughout Title I of the Committee Print to clarify the intent 
of the legislation and to incorporate recent recommendations 
from stakeholders.
    In addition, this amendment incorporates some good 
suggestions put forward by the Minority, and we thank everyone 
for those contributions.
    Several provisions of the amendment provide a clear 
explanation of research items for the office. This includes 
research activities in the Biological and Environmental 
Research programs, as well as for basic energy sciences, 
advanced scientific computing, and fusion energy research.
    Additionally, we made several technical corrections.
    I ask my colleagues to support the amendment. Is there 
further discussion on the amendment?
    The Chair recognizes Mr. Inglis.
    Mr. Inglis. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if this might be a good 
time for me to ask questions of counsel on Office of Science, 
Title I. Is that all right to dispense with that at this point?
    To get some questions about Title I, about the Office of 
Science. So in existing law the Systems Biology Program permits 
research to the production of fuels including hydrogen. The 
language included in the draft does not include any mention of 
hydrogen. The language has been rewritten to this, ``increased 
cost effective, sustainable production of biomass-based liquid 
transportation fuels, bioenergy, and bio-based products that 
minimize greenhouse gas emissions.''
    Is it the intent of this draft that hydrogen fuels no 
longer be included and be considered part of the program? Is 
that the intent of the drafting of this?
    Counsel. No, that is not the intent.
    Mr. Inglis. So any reason that the specific mention of 
hydrogen is taken out, or is it--do you feel that it is 
effectively covered in the language that is in there?
    Counsel. We do feel that it is effectively covered.
    Mr. Inglis. So let us think about that. Increased--cost 
effective, sustainable production, biomass-based liquid 
transportation fuels. I am not sure hydrogen fits in there. 
Right? That is one source of hydrogen. That is one way to get 
it. Another would be, for example, reforming natural gas, but 
maybe you are trying to exclude that, because reform natural 
gas doesn't fit there. Right?
    Counsel. The Biological Systems Science Program in this 
bill is specifically focused on the biological side, so the 
reforming through natural gas would probably be in a different 
program.
    Mr. Inglis. So I wonder if it is--what I am concerned about 
is we limit the options out there in hydrogen research, and we 
don't want to do that, or I certainly don't want to do that. So 
there are opportunities, all kinds of ways to create the 
hydrogen sources. It is just--we want to--I think we seem to be 
limiting it here. Is that right?
    Counsel. I am sorry. Could you repeat the question?
    Mr. Inglis. Well, I am sort of rambling. It is--I guess--
    Chairman Baird. Would the gentleman yield for a second?
    Mr. Inglis. Yeah.
    Chairman Baird. I am actually sympathetic to this line of 
questioning, and I am wondering if there may not be time to--I 
personally think we ought to make sure that hydrogen has a 
strong role broadly through the bill, and if there are 
biological--if I recall, and my memory may not be correct, 
there are other elements of the bill that do address hydrogen, 
but if the gentleman is of the belief that we should--we don't 
want to have a sin of omission by not including hydrogen, I 
think I would certainly--we don't have an amendment before us 
today, but before the bill moves to Full Committee I would 
certainly urge us to work with the gentleman and see what we 
could do on that. At least include it as an option, not 
necessarily a mandate but an option for research.
    Would that be satisfactory? Does the staff have--I yield 
back but--
    Counsel. We have no issues with that. I would also point 
out that there is research related to fuel cells within the 
Basic Energy Sciences Program and that includes hydrogen.
    Mr. Inglis. Okay. So I guess your point to me is that--my 
question here relates to the Systems Biology Program, and you 
are saying that this is--that is why it is so geared toward bio 
kind of sources rather than all the other sources of hydrogen.
    Okay, but I appreciate the Chairman's interest in making 
sure that we don't diminish the importance of pursuing 
hydrogen.
    And then the second question I have for you, in existing 
law biomedical research, including research on human cells or 
human subjects, is prohibited. The draft language omits a 
similar provision. Is this because the language aims to expand 
the scope of the program to biomedical research, or is there 
some other reason for this omission?
    Counsel. No, it does not plan on expanding the scope of the 
Bio Systems Science Program. It was omitted because we were 
trying to clean up the language, and we thought that that 
provision wasn't necessary at this time.
    Mr. Inglis. So what--how are we going to make sure to have 
protection against research on human cells or human subjects? I 
mean, wouldn't it be better to make that explicit than to be 
silent?
    Counsel. The counsel doesn't have an objection to that at 
all.
    Mr. Inglis. To making it explicit that we are not doing 
human subjects.
    Counsel. That is correct.
    Mr. Inglis. Human cells.
    Chairman Baird. Would the gentleman yield?
    I just--maybe that is something we should discuss. I am 
not--I want to make sure that we are not--let me give examples. 
I don't think anybody is talking about using human cells to 
generate energy resources, but I wouldn't want to preclude if 
there were--if this system were to have some analysis of the 
affects of something on a human system, I don't want to 
inadvertently block that, you know. If somebody were to say, 
for example, how does some products we are producing affect 
human beings? That we don't inadvertently say--now, that is 
different than sort of biological research on the human body, 
but I just want to run that by counsel if--what is your take on 
that?
    Counsel. I could point out, the origin of biological 
research within the Office of Science is actually the effects 
of radiation on people.
    Chairman Baird. I am aware of that, and our hearing raised 
that very issue, which is why I am reticent to be as amenable 
to this particular amendment.
    Mr. Inglis. I am with you, Mr. Chairman. I agree with you 
that you don't want to stop that kind of research you were just 
talking about because it would be--that would be problematic.
    I think the challenge that we are noticing is in current 
law we have this explicit prohibition, but on the 
reauthorization we are removing that. It seems to me that 
raises the possibility that this is intentional or that someone 
can argue that.
    Counsel. It is not intentional, and we did not imply that 
it should be something that is continued. In fact, in the 
budget the Department of Energy has phased out the one specific 
program that does do medical kinds of applications.
    Mr. Inglis. So as we go forward, maybe with the 
Chairman's--I agree with the Chairman. We don't want to limit 
what he--the research he was talking about, but I think it is 
important that we not set up any presumption by the removal of 
language from the existing bill, and it seems wise to me to 
maintain that language rather than omit it.
    So perhaps we can work on that as we go forward, and I 
thank you for letting me exceed my time here.
    Chairman Baird. Is there further discussion?
    If no, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say 
aye. Those opposed, say no. The ayes have it, and the amendment 
in agreed to.
    The second amendment on the roster is an amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Michigan, Dr. Ehlers. Dr. Ehlers, are you 
ready to proceed with your amendment?
    Mr. Ehlers. Yes. I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Baird. The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 034, amendment to the Committee 
Print offered by Mr. Ehlers of Michigan.
    Chairman Baird. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 
the reading.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I recognize the gentleman for five minutes to explain his 
amendment.
    Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment would 
strike the first portion of Section 103, the Office of Science 
activities, and insert a clear description of the Office of 
Science's mission and duties as described by the Office itself.
    My amendment would make clear that the activities of the 
Office of Science should focus on basic research as they have 
ever since the Department of Energy was formed. In fact, even 
before the Department of Energy was formed, and it was operated 
by the Atomic Energy Commission. It was always understood their 
primary focus would be basic research.
    I understand that the current language in the bill is 
included in Energy Policy Act of 2005, however, I do not 
believe that the inclusion of demonstration and commercial 
application activities actually reflects what the DOE's Office 
of Science does. In fact, DOE reports to NSF that they conduct 
entirely basic research each year, and the Office of Science is 
the single largest supporter of basic research in the physical 
sciences in the United States.
    So I am basically urging that we maintain that language 
which has traditionally been in there, that the Office of 
Science's mission and duties will be primarily in the area of 
basic research.
    Chairman Baird. The gentleman yield back the time?
    Mr. Ehlers. Yes.
    Chairman Baird. I will recognize myself for five minutes in 
response.
    As always the gentleman from Michigan offers some very 
thoughtful and constructive suggestions. My only hesitation 
would be that we had a number of witnesses testify at hearings 
about the importance of finding ways to move from the basic 
research into actual applied and production, and a number of 
witnesses at least testified that while we don't want to lose 
our emphasis on basic research, at least being more cognizant 
and putting some more attention on the production side is 
important. We have seen multiple examples where U.S. driven 
basic research doesn't yield production here but actually 
production overseas. So we fund innovation and the jobs go 
somewhere else.
    And so I want to be cognizant of that, and so I am inclined 
to accept the gentleman's amendment but with the caveat that 
since we have only had relatively little time to look at that, 
we want to reserve the right to discuss with the gentleman, 
possibly modify that before final--before the vote goes to 
final.
    Mr. Ehlers. Will the gentleman yield?
    Chairman Baird. Yes, I would be happy to yield.
    Mr. Ehlers. Just in response to that, first of all, I 
emphasize that the focus should be on basic research. It would 
not preclude doing other things.
    Secondly, I think, you know, and we discussed this briefly 
before the meeting, and I would have to go back, but my memory 
is that the Department of Energy has in the past had 
cooperative agreements that they have developed with 
entrepreneurs, with corporations and so forth, that when there 
is a practical application, then they develop a relationship 
between the Department and the corporation to work together on 
the proper application of the ideas that the basic research has 
developed and make them marketable in various ways.
    So I do not object to the Department cooperating that way. 
I am just worried about changing the focus as has been changed 
in the bill.
    Chairman Baird. The gentleman's point--
    Mr. Ehlers. I am sure we could work together on developing 
good language that would be acceptable to everyone.
    Chairman Baird. I am certain we can. The gentleman's point 
is well taken.
    Ms. Biggert, I am happy to yield to you.
    Ms. Biggert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think I probably 
have a very similar question, and I just put it into terms 
where it actually happens, and that would be many of our labs 
do work with industry and in testing products that the industry 
wants to, you know, go forward with, and I would hate to see 
that that wouldn't be able to happen. And we also have what we 
call the Valley of Death, which is something where, you have 
got the product, you have got the demonstration, but a company 
is not able to push it out into the community, and I think at 
some point we should really have more discussion on that. I 
know in some of the hearings it has been discussed, but how are 
we to--is there any way that we can help really to move those 
forward, if we want to keep the innovation and the creativity 
going. So many times we lose so many products that that doesn't 
happen that way.
    So I want to make sure that we don't lose that opportunity.
    Chairman Baird. I share the gentlelady's concern.
    I am happy to yield to Mr. Garamendi.
    Mr. Garamendi. I think it is very, very important that we 
maintain this transitional role for the Department. The basic 
science has been conducted in an extraordinary way and with 
great success in all of these various areas. It is that next 
step from the basic science to the application of it that is 
very, very important.
    I want to give a specific example. Part of this has to do 
with fusion power, either the NIF facility or one of the 
others. The next step at the NIF, assuming you get ignition and 
all the work that NIF needs to do, it could lead to fusion 
power. The--that moves from basic science to commercialization, 
and it is that transition, and that is just one of numerous 
examples that we find.
    So I think it is really important that the Department have 
the opportunity and frankly the explicit obligation to take 
that next step. Now, the application or the money to do it is 
another matter, but without the authorization, the money won't 
follow and will not be available.
    And so I really think the language as written is 
appropriate.
    Chairman Baird. Is there further discussion?
    Mr. Lujan is recognized for five minutes.
    Mr. Lujan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Dr. Ehlers, I very much appreciate the thought behind the 
flexibility as mentioned to Chairman Baird. My concerns are 
along the same line as Mr. Garamendi, and even yesterday we had 
a hearing with a panel that included investors, those that are 
involved with some of the universities, research institutions, 
and representatives from the Administration, that talked about 
the importance of making sure that when we have these 
scientific discoveries that we are able to push them a little 
bit. And it seems that that is one of the areas of frustration 
with some of the small businesses that I have engaged with as 
well in many of these areas.
    And the CRADA is the Cooperative Research and Development 
Agreements. What we saw in the 1990s is that there was 
utilization of these CRADAs, but it decreased as we approached 
2000 and 2001 because of some of those constraints, and I could 
not agree more that that is a vehicle that we need to go back 
to look at to see how we can increase that capacity.
    But I am very hesitant to take away the encouragement or 
the incentive to push it forward, and I would be happy to yield 
to Mr. Ehlers for any comments.
    Mr. Ehlers. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
    Let us remember what the purpose of the amendment is. We 
are talking here just about the Office of Science, and that has 
traditionally been focused on basic research, and I am just 
trying to make sure we don't lose that. That does not preclude 
the rest of the Department, which, of course, is much larger 
than the Office of Science from doing the sorts of the things 
that you have described and which they have traditionally done.
    I do think, however, and Chairman Baird, I think, would 
agree with this, that we should find out what they did in the 
past in terms of working with industry, because I know they 
have developed working relationships. They had, used to have a 
standard contractual procedure. I don't know if it is still 
there or not.
    So it doesn't preclude their continuing to do what they 
have done. It is just simply saying the focus of the Office of 
Science is basic research. Out of that springs all the other 
things that they can apply in various areas.
    Mr. Lujan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My concern is that the 
Department of Energy does not engage in the activities 
necessary to push the technology out, and we can have these 
grand ideas and these phenomenal technological advances where 
there are spin-offs off of ideas that we can't even imagine 
what the results can yield, but we can't push them out. And 
that is my concern with DOE; it seems that they sit on the 
shelf instead of helping advance commercialization or 
manufacturing here in the United States for job creation, which 
is a focus of mine. And coming from a district that has a few 
of the national laboratories in it and understanding how we 
need--as I stated earlier, to push this forward as opposed to 
pull back.
    So I appreciate learning more from you, Mr. Chairman, and 
from Mr. Ehlers.
    Mr. Ehlers. Yeah, and this does not preclude that from 
continuing to happen.
    Mr. Lujan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back my time.
    Chairman Baird. Thank you, Mr. Lujan.
    Any on the Minority side wish to be recognized?
    Mr. Gordon wanted to be.
    Mr. Inglis, did you want to be recognized?
    Mr. Inglis. Well, I just--yes, Mr. Chairman, thank you. 
Just to make the point that the Office of Science here we are 
talking about in this bill is $35.77 billion, ARPA-E is 3.4 
billion, and then the Hubs are .85 billion, 850 million, I 
guess.
    And it is--I think Dr. Ehlers makes a good point that we 
had this tension between wanting to do basic research, which is 
so crucial to get breakthroughs, and I think that everybody on 
this committee probably believes that that is an important role 
of our government in figuring out how to fund this basic 
research because nobody else is going to do it. It is not 
necessarily going to reach commercial application, and 
therefore, if you are trying to justify your shareholders' 
investment in it, you are just not going to be able to do it. 
So that is why we are so big on basic research.
    But we are also, as the gentleman was just saying, we are 
into getting advances in the economy, and so there is this 
tension between wanting to do basic research but yet wanting to 
commercialize it. I think Dr. Ehlers is just making the very 
good point, though, that in the--when we are talking about the 
Office of Science, we have historically been talking about 
basic research, we want to keep them focused on that, because 
there is no telling what will come out of it.
    Sort of like the Neutrino experiments that we saw at the 
South Pole. We have really no idea what is going to come out of 
that. There is no commercial application in sight, but it may 
help us understand energy that we don't understand at this 
point. And so we wouldn't want to siphon off money into 
immediate quarterly profit kind of motivation and pass out 
Neutrino experimentation at the South Pole as an example. I am 
not sure that is covered by this--actually funding comes out of 
this, but that is the kind of thing that we are--I think Dr. 
Ehlers is focusing on.
    Am I saying that right, Dr. Ehlers?
    Mr. Ehlers. Thank you for yielding. I just want to say, 
yes, that is correct. The whole intent here is to continue to 
operate the Office of Science the way it has been operating, 
which is basic research. There are other arms of working with 
industry, developing new ideas, more applied research is done 
elsewhere in DOE and not in, primarily in the Office of 
Science.
    So I am--just want to make sure that we are not by default 
changing the focus of the Office of Science by this bill, but 
we are maintaining the focus of the Office of Science in basic 
research, and we will continue all the other activities as they 
have been doing and will continue to do.
    Mr. Lujan. Would the gentleman yield, Mr. Inglis?
    Mr. Inglis. I am sorry. I would be happy to yield.
    Mr. Lujan. Thank you. Although I am reluctant to support 
this amendment, if I could get some assurance that we could 
work on some language, either in this legislation or down the 
road, that we could create a mechanism understanding that there 
has been a decrease in commercialization activity and the 
complexities associated with licensing going forward to move 
this technology out of DOE, wherever that basic science may be, 
I think I would be more inclined with supporting this 
amendment, seeing how we could work on that vehicle to get this 
moving.
    Mr. Inglis. Happy to yield to Dr. Ehlers.
    Mr. Ehlers. I am fine.
    Mr. Gordon. Would the gentleman yield? If the gentleman 
would yield. Listening to this discussion I think that we are 
remarkably in sync. We are all singing the same song, maybe 
just a little bit, you know, different. Clearly, we all 
recognize as Dr. Ehlers' point out, that the primary 
responsibility in the Office of Science, and I think across the 
Department of Energy, is basic research, but as Ms. Biggert 
points out, we need to keep an eye to that--getting through the 
Valley of Death with technology transfer. And as Mr. Baird 
points out, we certainly don't want to be, you know, developing 
some type of, again, new research that then is taken offshore.
    So I think we are all in sync. I think that Dr. Ehlers' 
amendment is in that spirit. I would suggest that we accept it 
and that I am sure he would be--if we have to word it a little 
bit, you know, between now and Full Committee, you know, that 
is fine, but I think he is representative of what we all feel 
is correct.
    Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Chairman Baird. Further discussion?
    The one final thing I would say is I intend to support it, 
but I really do want to underscore that I think there is a 
strong sense that has been expressed by the Committee that we 
do want to--while we maintain the focus on basic research, we 
do want also--personally those researchers who benefit from 
this money, and $5 billion is a serious chunk of change, it 
dwarfs ARPA-E, for example, and we face major, multiple 
challenges on our energy front. I personally want to put a 
marker down in this bill strongly and throughout the 
reauthorization of COMPETES that we value and respect the basic 
research, but we have some real-world problems we got to 
address, and we want those basic researchers to address those 
real-world problems. Among those real-world problems is 
employing the American people and solving our energy needs.
    And so I want to make sure that we keep that focus on basic 
research but with a peripheral vision at the very least of 
how--what it means.
    Mr. Ehlers. Yeah. No disagreement.
    Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, happy to yield.
    Mr. Garamendi. I understand where Dr. Ehlers is going, but 
the specific language of his amendment uses the word basic, and 
there is no other word to give direction to the Department that 
its task is more than basic research, and so if we accept his 
amendment, we ought to modify it so that the Chairman's point 
about the application of that basic research is somehow 
incorporated in this.
    Otherwise the current Director of this Department is 
instructed very clearly. It is basic, and there is nothing more 
in the language. So I think we need to broaden if we are going 
to go down with route with the acceptance of the amendment.
    Mr. Ehlers. Will the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Garamendi. Certainly.
    Mr. Ehlers. First, let me point out that the word used is 
focus. It doesn't say that is all they can do. That is their 
primary focus as it has been.
    Furthermore, we chose that language very carefully because 
that is precisely what is in the President's budget bill that 
they sent and described the function of the Office of Science 
and referred specifically to the focus on basic research.
    So we are basically continuing with what has always been 
there and what the President has talked about in his budget.
    Mr. Garamendi. I see my task of modifying what exists 
today. I didn't come here to stay where we were yesterday but 
rather to move to tomorrow, and we, in my view we have to take 
this basic science and move it into the commercial sector, and 
there are numerous ways to do that, and focus is still even 
more precise, you shall focus on this.
    I think we need to get the words, this transition, into the 
language of the purpose of the Office.
    Chairman Baird. What might be constructed is rather than 
trying to wordsmith it in detail here, which we could do, but 
this is Subcommittee markup. We are going to be going to Full 
Committee with the consent of the Chairman who spoke earlier. 
We might be able to revisit this issue in that interim if Mr. 
Ehlers is amenable, and rather than trying to wordsmith it 
here, the sense of Dr. Ehlers to keep that attention there but, 
Mr. Garamendi and I think many other Members of the Committee 
have spoken well on this, let's bring the amendment up to a 
vote at this point with the proviso that we will revisit this 
before it goes to full markup.
    But, of course, if Members oppose that, they are free to 
vote nay, and that is obviously an option here as well.
    Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, if Mr. or Governor Garamendi 
would yield just a moment, part of the--we have been very 
strict about going through regular order on this committee, and 
that is letting the subcommittees have hearings, you know, we 
have subcommittee markups and then we will go to Full 
Committee, and that is really the purpose. I mean, this is, you 
know, a legitimate concern on both sides. It was raised, and as 
Chairman Baird said, I think we can work this out, but, again, 
this is the reason why it is good to have subcommittee markups 
to raise these issues, and we--I am sure we can get it worked 
out.
    We are all on the same--we are all in good faith, I think, 
saying the same thing.
    Mr. Garamendi. Well, I suppose that if this is going to go 
forward, I want to lay down a marker that says I think we ought 
to have this transition in the language for the Department, and 
you know, fine, we can accept the amendment, but I want to be 
very clear about the necessity of transition, and I recall well 
Dr. Ehlers' discussion about the Agricultural Extension Service 
and the way in which that operates in transitioning.
    Now, so they got basic science and transition from the 
basic science and agriculture to the application of that in the 
real world, and I think we ought to make sure that, in my view, 
that needs to be part of the role of this office.
    I want to lay down my own marker here about where I am 
coming from on this matter.
    Chairman Baird. Hearing no further discussion, the vote 
occurs on the amendment. All those in favor will say aye. 
Opposed, no. No. The ayes have it, and the amendment is agreed 
to, and I will look forward to working with our colleagues to 
resolve these, I think very legitimate and important questions, 
and we will do that in the interim before the markup. So thank 
you for your input on this.
    The third amendment on the roster is an amendment offered 
again by the gentleman from Michigan, Dr. Ehlers. Dr. Ehlers, 
are you ready to proceed with this amendment?
    Mr. Ehlers. I am ready, and we can go very rapidly if no 
one has any questions on it.
    Chairman Baird. The clerk will report the amendment, 
please.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 033, amendment to the Committee 
Print offered by Mr. Ehlers of Michigan.
    Chairman Baird. Ask unanimous consent to dispense with the 
reading.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I recognize the gentleman from Michigan for five minutes to 
explain his amendment.
    Mr. Ehlers. Once again this is a matter of language. We are 
trying to clarify what we are doing here and making an accord 
with the President's request, budget request.
    Part of the role of this authorization is to codify the 
Energy Frontier Research Centers for the first time, and this 
amendment will align the authorization within this bill with 
the DOE description of the Energy Frontier Research Centers.
    DOE's description of the centers in the budget states, 
``The EFRCs, that is the Energy Frontier Research Centers, 
harness the most basic and advanced discovery research in a 
concerted effort to accelerate the scientific breakthroughs 
needed to create advanced energy technologies for the 21st 
century. These centers bring together critical masses of 
researchers to conduct fundamental energy research in a new era 
of grand challenge science and use-inspired energy research.''
    And I might just insert here a comment that is basically 
what I believe a number of Members here are saying they would 
like to see.
    Since technology development, demonstration, or commercial 
application is not mentioned as the purpose of the centers, it 
is clear to me that the frontier centers clearly are 
fundamental research projects. The bill should make that clear. 
My amendment would incorporate the language from the budget, so 
instead of saying on page 4, ``to meet energy research 
development, demonstration, and commercial application needs 
identified in,'' the language would be amended to say, ``to 
conduct fundamental and use inspired energy research to 
accelerate scientific breakthroughs related to needs identified 
in.''
    I--again, the whole idea is just to clarify and make sure 
that we are in sync with what the President has requested, what 
the Department has been doing and hopes to continue to be 
doing.
    So I urge its adoption.
    Chairman Baird. Thank the gentleman. Is there further 
discussion of the amendment?
    Mr. Lujan is recognized for five minutes.
    Mr. Lujan. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
    Just, again, to reiterate the same concerns that we brought 
up before and not to continue this discussion but look forward 
to looking at this as well to make sure that we find that 
vehicle going forward to support commercialization.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Baird. Your point is well made yet again.
    Further discussion?
    Hearing none the motion or the vote occurs on the 
amendment. All in favor, say aye. Those opposed, no. In the 
opinion of the Chair the ayes have it. The amendment is agreed 
to.
    The fourth amendment on the roster is an amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Illinois, Dr. Lipinski. Are you ready to 
proceed with your amendment?
    Mr. Lipinski. I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Baird. The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 058, amendment to the Committee 
Print offered by Mr. Lipinski of Illinois.
    Chairman Baird. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 
the reading.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I recognize the gentleman for five minutes to explain this 
amendment.
    Mr. Lipinski. Thank you, Chairman Baird, and I appreciate 
all the hard work that you and Chairman Gordon have put into 
this legislation that we are considering today. I would also 
like to thank Ranking Member Inglis and Congresswoman Biggert 
of Illinois for their work and leadership on this.
    This legislation definitely is vital for long-term 
competitiveness for our country, and I am very proud to be a 
cosponsor of it.
    This amendment is a small step toward improving U.S. 
manufacturing competitiveness. I don't need to tell anyone that 
American manufacturers are facing hard times. If we want to 
stop manufacturing jobs continuing to go overseas, we need to 
compete on innovation and quality. High-performance computing 
modeling and simulation tools help domestic manufacturers 
compete by reducing design cycle time and development costs, 
improving performance and efficiency, and reducing waste.
    It is a potentially game-changing technology, a crucial 
domestic edge that can help build and sustain our manufacturing 
sector. The Office of Science has long been a leader in 
advanced scientific computing research, and indeed, many of our 
largest companies have sought out their expertise, forged 
productive partnerships, and built significant competitive 
advantages.
    Companies like Proctor and Gamble, Boeing, and General 
Electric are taking advantage of national lab facilities, but 
too many manufacturers, especially small manufacturers, have no 
idea what tools and expertise are out there or even who to talk 
to at the national labs. This is an issue that has been brought 
to me by many manufacturers, and I think there is much more 
that we can do.
    My amendment would help solve this problem by establishing 
an outreach program within the Advanced Computing Program. It 
would aim to build public-private partnerships between 
manufacturers and national labs, opening the door for a broad 
range of new collaborations.
    So simply within the Advanced Computing Program to have 
this outreach program it would help to make many manufacturers 
aware of what is available and hopefully will help them to also 
compete better in the world economy. This is something, as I 
said, that many of the larger manufacturing companies take 
advantage of. I want to do all we can to broaden that, so I 
think this is a modest, commonsense step, and I ask my 
colleagues to support this amendment.
    Chairman Baird. I thank the gentleman from Illinois.
    Is there further discussion?
    Mr. Garamendi.
    Mr. Garamendi. A question on this. I agree totally with 
what is being proposed here, but my question relates to the 
role of the Director, and I think out of ignorance here I am 
asking a question of the Chair. The Director is responsible for 
overseeing specific laboratories. I think there are ten labs 
that the Director oversees. There are other laboratories that 
are doing major computational science, and those are under the 
National Nuclear Security Agency. Livermore and Los Alamos are 
two that come immediately to mind.
    They have the potential of playing a--the exact similar 
role, but because the--this is directed towards the other labs, 
not those labs, it would be, I think, in our interest to 
broaden this particular section to include or to allow the 
Director to work with the other laboratories to achieve a 
similar goal.
    Chairman Baird. It is my understanding--I will defer to 
counsel on this, but it is my understanding that we really 
don't--if you are referring to the DOD, the jurisdictional 
issues of the other--
    Mr. Garamendi. This is the Department of Energy 
laboratories, the National Nuclear Security labs. Or the agency 
oversees the Livermore Lab and the Los Alamos Lab that have 
great computing capabilities and could play a role similar to 
what is played here, and perhaps that ought to be in a 
different section, a different part of the COMPETES Bill.
    But clearly those laboratories can play the same role that 
Mr. Lipinski is trying to achieve here.
    Chairman Baird. There are just two quick issues on that, if 
I may.
    One, the jurisdictional issue. We certainly don't want to 
write this bill in such a way that we get bounced into a DOD 
jurisdictional fight, which could happen I would imagine, but 
secondly, my understanding of that issue is there are some 
fairly significant security issues when one makes those assets 
available that are also present in the other but less so.
    But I will defer--if counsel wants to address this in some 
way, I will defer to them.
    Counsel. The Committee has jurisdiction over energy 
research, development, demonstration, and commercial 
application activities. The Committee does not have 
jurisdiction over national security activities within NNSA. 
That is the Armed Services Committee.
    Mr. Garamendi. I think that is not the case. The--within 
the Department--do we have the Department of Energy?
    Counsel. We have parts of the Department of Energy.
    Mr. Garamendi. But not the national--
    Counsel. Not the national security activities of the NNSA.
    Mr. Garamendi. I will pursue this separate and apart.
    Thank you very much.
    Chairman Baird. Thank you, Mr. Garamendi. We will discuss 
that further.
    Are there further discussion?
    If not, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in favor, say 
aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes have it, and the amendment is 
agreed to.
    The fifth amendment on the roster is an amendment offered 
by the gentleman from California, Mr. Garamendi. Are you ready 
to proceed with your amendment?
    The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 001, amendment to the Committee 
Print offered by Mr. Garamendi of California.
    Mr. Garamendi. This amendment deals with the fusion power 
issues and specifically asks that the Director report back to 
us within 180 days of the completion of the study by the 
National Academy of Sciences.
    In other words, we need to know, and so please tell us.
    Chairman Baird. I appreciate the gentleman for his brevity. 
A commonsense request.
    Is there further discussion with comparable brevity on the 
amendment?
    That is the best. If no, then the vote occurs on the 
amendment. All in favor, say aye. Those opposed, no. The ayes 
have it. The amendment is agreed to.
    The sixth amendment on the roster is an amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Illinois, Dr. Lipinski. Dr. Lipinski, are 
you ready to proceed with your amendment?
    Mr. Lipinski. Yes. I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Baird. The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 057, amendment to the Committee 
Print offered by Mr. Lipinski of Illinois.
    Chairman Baird. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 
the reading.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I recognize the gentleman for five minutes to explain the 
amendment.
    Mr. Lipinski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The amendment at the desk will improve the implementation 
of the Science Laboratories Infrastructure Program created in 
this bill. All of us understand that the Office of Science 
laboratories are national assets that consistently deliver 
remarkable discoveries in scientific tools, but many of the 
buildings and facilities of the Office of Science laboratory 
system are reaching the end of their useful lives. We need to 
make sure that they can support the scientific mission of the 
Office of Science, that we are taking care of the investments 
we have already made, and that our national labs continue to be 
vital resources for academic and industrial scientists alike.
    The Infrastructure Modernization Program will help address 
these concerns, and I am glad that it is part of this 
legislation. My amendment simply will require basic information 
about maintenance and infrastructure needs and associated 
funding requirements to be included in a report to Congress.
    So simply this is about reporting. I think it will 
certainly be very helpful. It is critical to know what 
maintenance is needed, what the infrastructure needs are, the 
funding, just to have more information as we move forward on 
this.
    So I ask for support of this simple yet important 
amendment, and I yield back.
    Chairman Baird. Is there further discussion of the 
amendment?
    Ms. Biggert.
    Ms. Biggert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would support this 
amendment. I think there are so many of the labs that really 
are in need of maintenance on their infrastructure, and 
sometimes that gets lost, you know, in the funding because it 
tends to be at the bottom of the list, and I think that we all 
know that no matter what infrastructure, whether it is a lab or 
anything else, our houses or whatever, that you really need to 
take care of things as we move along and not wait until it is, 
you know, such a crucial element and much more expensive.
    And I would support the amendment.
    Chairman Baird. The gentlelady's point is well taken. We 
have had hearings here not only about the federal labs but 
about university labs, and I think it is symptomatic. We all 
want to do the new thing, and we don't maintain what we have 
got sometimes.
    Further discussion?
    Hearing none, the vote occurs on the amendment. All in 
favor, say aye. Those opposed, not. The ayes have it, and the 
amendment is agreed to.
    The seventh amendment on the roster is an amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Michigan, Dr. Ehlers. Dr. Ehlers, are you 
ready to proceed with your amendment?
    Mr. Ehlers. Yes. I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Baird. The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 035, amendment to the Committee 
Print offered by Mr. Ehlers of Michigan.
    Chairman Baird. Ask unanimous consent to dispense with the 
reading.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I recognize the gentleman for five minutes to explain his 
amendment.
    Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This addresses an issue about setting authorizations in the 
bill, which is something that we normally have not done, and in 
particular my concern is there are certain authorizations 
established which are quite high and others are not set and 
presumed would continue at the previous rate.
    Let me just get into some of the specifics here, and the 
wording specifics set aside to Congress is as exercising its 
right to establish priorities for research funding at the 
Department. However, I fear that we have overlooked the 
important contributions of nuclear physics, high-energy 
physics, and fusion energy sciences by not establishing 
authorizations for these programs.
    The Nuclear Physics Program, for example, funds a workforce 
at our universities that is critical to any nuclear future, and 
I think most individuals who are concerned about electricity 
generation in the future regard nuclear as the best option at 
this point.
    This committee is very intent on solving some of the 
challenges of nuclear waste and the fuel cycle, and there is no 
way we are going to competitive in the arena unless we are 
educating students in this area.
    Additionally, I am concerned that the precedent set here is 
one of Congress picking winners and losers. In the context of a 
five-year authorization, the Department may need flexibility to 
work within its overall authorization to adjust different 
programs year to year.
    Consequently I believe that we will allow for the potential 
for the agency to be more competitive if we remove the specific 
authorization levels for any of these programs. My amendment 
would remove the set-aside authorizations from the bill 
entirely, remaining silent on funding for the Office of Science 
except for the overall Office of Science authorization levels. 
This is what we have traditionally done.
    Let me give some specific examples. I have here increases 
in BES, BER, and ASCR. That is the alphabet soup for various 
programs, but it specifies increases of 10.6 percent in 
authorization for 2012, 10.6 for 2013, 9.5 for 2014, 10.2 for 
2015. Now, I would love to see this increase in authorizations, 
especially if it would lead to increase in appropriations.
    But the cost is that we are holding the fusion, fission, 
and nuclear increases of 3.2 percent, 2.9 percent, 4.0 percent, 
and 2.9 percent by remaining silent on that without giving any 
numbers. That is just not a good match.
    And the question is why are we proposing this, and my 
suggestion is that we will remove these set-aside 
authorizations and continue as we have in the past, working 
between this committee, the Appropriations Committee, and the 
Department of Energy to establish good authorizations each year 
and appropriations each year.
    So that is the purpose of the amendment, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Baird. Mr. Garamendi is recognized.
    Mr. Garamendi. I guess because I am such a freshman that I 
am going to be talking more than perhaps I should. Dr. Ehlers, 
I agree entirely with you about the fusion and the nuclear 
energy issue, but I am not sure that I agree on the way in 
which you are trying to accomplish it here. I think it is--I am 
perfectly happy to tell people what I think we ought to be 
doing, how we ought to be spending money from this committee, 
and it does this, although it doesn't speak to the fusion piece 
of it, which I think we ought to.
    In other words, I think we ought to tell them, here is how 
we believe things ought to be spent, and I would prefer that 
you would not strike this but add the fusion piece to it and 
work through that process.
    Mr. Ehlers. Will the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Garamendi. Certainly.
    Mr. Ehlers. That may well be a possibility, but then I 
think we have to sit down and look at the whole area, and 
traditionally we have not done this. We have set authorizations 
for the Department and then every year worked with the 
appropriators and the Department to choose the specific numbers 
for that year.
    I am very concerned about the fusion aspects. You, of 
course, are worried about the laser activity and things of that 
sort, but also we are collaborators with several other nations 
in developing the ITER Project in France, and that, again, is 
starting to reach fruition, and we are going to need 
substantial increase in that area.
    Mr. Garamendi. I guess what I would--if you would yield?
    Mr. Ehlers. Yeah.
    Mr. Garamendi. What I would recommend here is that we enter 
into a really serious discussion about how to allocate these 
funds and see to it that the fusion piece of it is properly 
noted and allocated. Now, I am all for this committee 
suggesting in legislation how the appropriators ought to 
appropriate.
    Mr. Ehlers. Well, there are many, many different issues if 
I may. I raised the one about the educational programs. I 
thought it was a horrible mistake some years ago when we 
basically cut out the nuclear reactor programs at a number of 
universities, including the University of Michigan in Ann 
Arbor, which had one of the best educational programs. Now we 
need nuclear engineers. We don't have them.
    And so I thought that was very short-sighted, and it is 
proving to be that. So I think, yeah, I am certainly amenable, 
Mr. Chairman, to having continued discussion on this before we 
move onto the Floor with it, but I would suggest we just adopt 
the amendment now and work together on coming up with the final 
version that we will present on the Floor.
    Chairman Baird. Mr. Garamendi, do you yield back your time?
    Mr. Garamendi. Well, I will just go back to say that I 
think what needs to be done here is to bring the nuclear issue 
into this and add that into it rather than subtracting what is 
already here. Obviously the numbers are going to change, and 
that is to be expected.
    Either way as long as we get to the end where we use what 
power this committee has to say here is our priorities, and I 
certainly think we ought to add the nuclear fission, fusion 
into it. And I would love the education piece, too.
    Mr. Ehlers. Yeah.
    Chairman Baird. Ms. Biggert.
    Ms. Biggert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I rise in strong 
support of this amendment. I do have a concern about the 
appearance of singling out the three specific programs, and I 
think that it really raises the question of winners and losers. 
Are we really, you know, deciding what funding--and since the 
funding goes through 2015, I think we lose flexibility since we 
are talking about basic research and programs that will change 
as the years go along, and to decide that--which ones will get 
a specific amount of money when one year they might need more, 
the next year they might need less, and I think this has to be 
decided, you know, in NIH, you know, we have the research 
there.
    We don't decide how much is going to go to cancer research, 
how much is going to go to a specific, you know, diabetes, 
whatever. That really is left up to the experts, and I think we 
lose the flexibility for all of these programs.
    And I think it is sending a, you know, it is sending a real 
message that there are favorite programs, and I also think that 
it could discourage researchers, young researchers deciding 
what kind of program they want to go into, and they see that 
there is a lack of commitment for a--to a broad-based national 
science program so that they might not go into that, and that 
is how we are going to have losers that aren't going to have 
the scientists going into that area.
    So I think that this is a real problem to just, you know, 
to have just the funding for those. We need the flexibility, 
and with that I would yield back.
    Mr. Gordon. Well, if the gentlelady would yield.
    Ms. Biggert. Yes, I will.
    Mr. Gordon. I think most of us would like to see increases, 
you know, across the board, and there will be increases across 
the board. I think we have to be somewhat practical here, and 
that is that the appropriators are going to be the ones that 
are going to finally put the, you know, put the money in the 
holes, where it is going to go.
    And so the question I guess is, you know, through the 
testimony that we have received from various witnesses is 
should we put a sort of a marker down as to we want to see 
general increases, but here are some areas that for our 
national, international competitiveness should be given 
priority.
    So it is just whether or not we want to, you know, go 
around the back door and whisper in the appropriator's ear. I 
am not sure what that will do, or whether we should make some 
statement earlier. Again, this is not trying to penalize any 
other program. It is just, you know, whether or not we feel 
like we need to send a message to the appropriators.
    I thank you, and I yield back.
    Ms. Biggert. Well, my question is since we have already put 
down these markers for every year, we are saying that that is 
the way it is and let us say three years from now there is a 
new, you know, a new program that is really important and needs 
more funding and can that be changed?
    Mr. Gordon. Well, first of all, again, if the gentlelady 
would yield. Certainly it can change, and again, this is just a 
message to the appropriators. We may want to send them a 
different message later on. It is just, you know, how relevant 
do we want to be in trying to set priorities?
    Once again, this--otherwise what we are doing is just say 
increase, you know, that we are satisfied with the status quo, 
just, you know, if we are going to have a three percent 
increase or a four percent increase, just raise everything the 
same.
    And so, I guess, you know, again, whether or not we want to 
use some type of a statement from this committee, from the 
witnesses that we have heard from, that there should be some 
priorities. I know certainly talking with, talking with NASA, 
for example, Mr. Mollohan wants us to try to set some 
priorities. He wants us to try to give them some direction. I 
think to not do so we acquiesce the hearings that we have had, 
the recommendations that have come before us to appropriators 
who have not had that benefit.
    Ms. Biggert. Has that happened in the past, Mr. Chairman?
    Mr. Gordon. Has what happened in the past?
    Ms. Biggert. Have we ever had a marker down and the 
appropriators have not acquiesced to that? Have we had a 
marker?
    Mr. Gordon. I can't imagine that they have followed our 
wishes perfectly over the years.
    Ms. Biggert. I yield back.
    Chairman Baird. I thank the gentlelady.
    I recognize myself for five minutes. I am actually 
sympathetic to the argument of the Chairman and Mr. Garamendi. 
I think one of the roles of this committee and the reason we 
have hearings and the reason there is a Science Committee is 
that we have hearings, and we look at the expenditures and 
programs within the various agencies under our jurisdiction, 
and we quite appropriately make recommendations. That is what 
it means to be on this committee. That is what it means to have 
a Science Committee.
    Of course, the appropriators sometimes ignore that, but I 
think it is important for us to put direction down. Now, a 
couple of points about that.
    One, there is room in the bill as written for all, for 
growth in all of the areas, so if it is more specified in some 
than others, but there is room for growth in all of the areas, 
and we are talking about fairly generous growth relative to 
other aspects of the federal budget.
    Secondly, in the areas in which--that are singled out here 
for perhaps somewhat greater authorization levels, are areas 
that in the Committee's judgment based on the hearings we have 
had are more likely to produce rewards for the investment, and 
that is why we have chosen to single those out.
    And then, third, some of the areas that are being 
identified by the amendment as somehow--or by the discussion of 
the amendment at least somehow subject to neglect, already 
receive a fairly generous portion of the funding budget of the 
overall budget. So though I understand the sentiment of Dr. 
Ehlers, in this case I am reluctantly inclined to oppose the 
amendment and maintain the legislation as written.
    Mr. Ehlers. Will the gentleman yield?
    Chairman Baird. I would be happy to yield.
    Mr. Ehlers. Just to comment on that, going back a little 
further in history, you recall some years ago the America 
COMPETES Act, we decided we wanted to increase the funding with 
authorization and appropriation of the Department of Energy and 
the National Science Foundation and so forth. Rather 
substantial increase. We talked about doubling and three years 
doubling it, five years, things of those sort, and that, I 
think, was a very important step forward because the research 
that we do in this Nation drives the economy in many ways.
    What I am drawing attention to here with my amendment is 
the lack of appropriate authorizations in my mind for fusion 
and nuclear and some of the others. The increases that are in 
authorizations that are in the bill are actually less than the 
inflation rate that we have averaged over the last five years, 
which is about 3.3 percent.
    So that seems to me inappropriate when we are giving over 
10 percent increases annually for four years in a row to 
certain areas and holding others below the actual rate of 
inflation. So I, you know, it just seems to me that is 
shortsighted, and particularly in view of the needs that we are 
going to have in fusion in the next few years, the needs we are 
going to have in nuclear engineering, education, and so forth.
    So my attempt is to try to--maybe I am taking a 
sledgehammer to it by saying we are just going to set these 
aside, and I am open to other ways of approaching them, but I 
just think it is not wise to keep the levels in law that we 
have included in the bill at this point.
    Chairman Baird. I reclaim my time and recognize Mr. 
Garamendi.
    Mr. Garamendi. Mr. Chairman, if I might, I find myself both 
in agreement and disagreement with Mr. Ehlers here. His point, 
I think, is one that is well taken that the overall 
authorizations, that is the $6 billion, $7 billion, and so 
forth, are below the rate of inflation, and since we are 
authorizing, we ought to authorize to the maximum extent that 
we can afford embarrassment, so just short of that point. That 
gives the authorization. Whether the money is going to be 
appropriated or not is another matter.
    And that--the three items in each of these three-year 
authorizations are really minuscule compared to the total. The 
first one is $3.1 million of the $6.2 billion. It is--and 
similarly small amounts in each of the years thereafter, but it 
does give direction to the Department, and I am all for, you 
know, I spent time as the Deputy Secretary at the Department of 
Interior, and I was quite happy to have total authority to 
spend the money anyway we wanted to spend it, but now I am 
here, and I want them to spend it the way I want them to spend 
it.
    So these are really small, and I would like to work with 
Dr. Ehlers on this and increase the total authorizations and if 
necessary, add the nuclear issues to it, including the 
education issues. You know, when I am on that side, give me all 
the power, and I will spend the money wisely. When I am on this 
side, let us spend it the way we think it ought to be spent, 
and I am delighted to work with it.
    I would suggest that the amendment not go forward, that we 
work on adding to this section the issues that Dr. Ehlers is 
concerned about.
    Chairman Baird. Mr. Garamendi, before I recognize 
colleagues on this side, I will just clarify. Some years ago, a 
couple--I am one of the few Members that actually read the 
``dark version'' of the Intel Bill, and a few years ago as I 
read through it there was language that I think said that--that 
is a very good point. She said ``don't tell, they will shoot 
me'', but the gist of it was the preface language to the 
budgetary amounts said all--if I remember correctly-all numbers 
are in millions. And, in fact, it was actually thousands. Had 
they been in millions we would have been spending multiple 
trillions of dollars on--I can't tell you what or they would 
shoot me, but we seem to have done that a little bit here.
    And the manager's amendment corrects it, but there are 
typos in the text of the language. I am going to ask counsel to 
clarify that, so this is substantive, and I want to make--
because we have got, I think, three orders. We have got a three 
orders of magnitude errors here, which is substantive.
    Counsel, could you clarify that just so Members looking at 
the text--
    Counsel. This is corrected in the manager's amendment.
    Chairman Baird. But give us some examples just--
    Counsel. Okay.
    Chairman Baird. Mr. Garamendi cited a number which I think 
is actually about 1,000 higher, and it is not your mistake. It 
is the text of the bill.
    Counsel. The breakouts for the individual sub programs and 
the authorization levels need to all be multiplied by 1,000. 
They need three more zeros.
    Chairman Baird. Not your fault, Mr. Garamendi. No. You were 
reading well, and then that is why the hard part--as some of 
you know, I have championed this idea that we have time to read 
it, and that is why we have time to read these things so we 
find them.
    The manager's amendment corrects some of that, but it is 
certainly misleading when one looks and says, ``oh, this is not 
very much'', and it turns out it is a lot.
    So apologies on behalf of the staff. I think Mr. Neugebauer 
wanted to be recognized.
    Mr. Neugebauer. Yeah, and I will just be brief. I think 
what I heard Mr. Ehlers say, and I want to be--clarify this, 
you know, there are some feeling here we need to bump up the 
authorization levels. I heard Mr. Ehlers saying that being 
specific about, you know, may limit the flexibility, but, you 
know, I think the overall question here is we are running these 
kinds of deficits that are truly unsustainable where we are 
talking about doubling the national debt in 5 years and 
tripling it in 10 years.
    Should this committee be sending a signal that we need to 
be bumping up spending? Should the signal be more--should we be 
sending a signal of prioritization, and whether we want to take 
on that prioritization or not is another discussion, but the 
real question here is is I think, you know, should we be moving 
forward with an authorization that is increasing when, you 
know, we are borrowing every dollar we spend under this 
authorization. As soon as it is appropriated, we are going to 
borrow 40 cents of that money.
    So I just ask that as--if Mr. Ehlers' amendment helps us 
accomplish a push of the agency to--or for us to stop and pause 
and think, well, maybe as a committee we need to do some--help 
that prioritization, I am willing to do that, but I am a little 
reluctant to, you know, move down the road and saying we got to 
spend more money.
    Chairman Baird. Will the gentleman yield back? Just very 
briefly to respond and then I will recognize my colleague, Mr. 
Inglis, or actually if someone on this side wants to comment. I 
am very sensitive to that argument and respect it very much.
    I think one of the issues is if one looks at where, for 
example, our balance of trade deficit goes, a very substantial 
portion of that is energy dependence, and if one looks at a 
host of other things that are costing our economic 
competitiveness, it is contributed to by the cost of energy.
    My hunch is that every committee in this Congress believes 
that their jurisdiction is meritorious of an increase while the 
others aren't, and they quite rightly can make arguments about 
that, but this is our committee. I will make the argument for 
it here.
    I agree with the gentleman. We need to find ways to reduce 
expenditures I believe, including entitlements and on the 
discretionary side. At the same time, however, I also believe 
that our competitiveness as a country economically and our 
ultimate financial stability is going to depend on 
breakthroughs in this very realm. That is why I am so 
enthusiastic about the Chairman's initiative with COMPETES in 
general and ARPA-E.
    And so sensitive to this broader issue of fiscal 
implications, I do think we also have a responsibility to say 
from this committee's perspective, at least my personal 
perspective, investments in energy are--have the potential to 
return a strong investment.
    The gentleman's point is well taken.
    Further discussion on this side? Mr. Inglis wanted to be 
recognized.
    Mr. Inglis. Mr. Chairman, I think it is--what you just said 
is well said. We are borrowing an awful lot of money. When you 
have a debtor in possession, it is quite possible that 
bankruptcy court will allow the debtor to borrow some money if 
they got a good plan, a good idea that might get them out of 
bankruptcy, and that is really where we find ourselves as a 
country, I believe.
    And so you got to be asking, is it worth borrowing the 
money for this? And I agree with what the Chairman just said, 
that in many cases we have the opportunity here to power 
ourselves out of the current situation by breakthroughs. And so 
that all makes sense, and I think most people on our committee 
agree with that.
    We are sort of back to the beginning here, though, on this 
debate on Dr. Ehlers' amendment here, because this is the very 
first debate we were having on the first Ehlers' amendment, 
which is is this committee going to try to direct the Office of 
Science to do applied research? Or is it going to preserve the 
Office of Science pure science role? I think this is--I don't 
know if Dr. Ehlers wants to comment on that, but I think the 
amendment he is talking about here is just the same as our 
first amendment, which is--or the first amendment that you 
offered, is the question if these sort of directions in A, B, 
and C in the language here are really designed to direct the 
Office of Science, it seems to me, to do applied work rather 
than to do the basic work.
    And so it goes back to that first question.
    Chairman Baird. And that is a recess call and not a vote.
    Mr. Inglis. And it is also--I think it is important to note 
that while it is possible for us to revisit this authorization 
and change these numbers if there is a breakthrough as Dr. 
Ehlers well points out with some new technology, the problem 
would be that it is a fairly complicated reprogramming process 
for the Department of Energy to go through with the 
appropriators to move that one around, which takes time, and we 
might not have time. We are in a race with the Chinese, for 
example, on these technologies, and if we plan on winning that 
race, we need some flexibility at the Department.
    And it is an odd place that we on this side of the aisle 
find ourselves in. We are here arguing for flexibility on 
behalf of a Democratic Administration to move quickly to change 
things at the Department of Energy. So we find ourselves in a 
rather awkward position here, arguing for flexibility for 
Secretary Chu to do what we needs to do with new developments.
    So we are trying to help him out. It is sort of an odd 
position, so I yield back.
    Chairman Baird. Very interesting observation with respect 
to the Administration and Secretary Chu. I still think we want 
to exercise some jurisdiction here.
    Is there further discussion, or shall we call the vote on 
this?
    Hearing no further discussion, the vote occurs on the 
amendment. All those in favor, say aye. Those opposed, no. It 
appears the no's have it. The no's have it. The amendment is 
not agreed to.
    Mr. Ehlers. Could I ask for a recorded vote?
    Chairman Baird. The gentleman asks for a recorded vote. The 
clerk will call the roll.
    The Clerk. Chairman Baird.
    Chairman Baird. No.
    The Clerk. Chairman Baird votes no. Mr. Costello.
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Woolsey.
    Ms. Woolsey. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Woolsey votes no. Mr. Lujan.
    Mr. Lujan. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Lujan votes no. Mr. Tonko.
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Ms. Johnson. Ms. Johnson.
    Ms. Johnson. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Johnson votes no. Mr. Lipinski.
    Mr. Lipinski. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Lipinski votes no. Ms. Giffords.
    Ms. Giffords. No.
    The Clerk. Ms. Giffords votes no. Mr. Matheson.
    Mr. Matheson. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Matheson votes no. Mr. Davis.
    Mr. Davis. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Davis votes no. Mr. Chandler.
    Mr. Chandler. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chandler votes no. Mr. Garamendi.
    Mr. Garamendi. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Garamendi votes no. Mr. Gordon.
    Mr. Gordon. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Gordon votes no. Mr. Inglis.
    Mr. Inglis. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Inglis votes aye. Mr. Bartlett.
    Mr. Bartlett. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Bartlett votes aye. Mr. Ehlers.
    Mr. Ehlers. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Ehlers votes aye. Mrs. Biggert.
    Ms. Biggert. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mrs. Biggert votes aye. Mr. Akin.
    [No response.]
    The Clerk. Mr. Neugebauer.
    Mr. Neugebauer. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Neugebauer votes aye. Mr. Diaz-Balart.
    Mr. Diaz-Balart. Aye.
    The Clerk. Mr. Diaz-Balart votes aye. Mr. Hall.
    [No response.]
    Chairman Baird. Would the clerk--has everyone voted, or are 
there additional Members?
    Mr. Tonko.
    The Clerk. Mr. Tonko is not recorded.
    Mr. Tonko. No.
    The Clerk. Mr. Tonko votes no.
    Chairman Baird. Are all other Members recorded that wish to 
be recorded on both sides?
    The clerk will report the tally.
    The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, six Members vote aye, and 12 
Members vote no.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>


    Chairman Baird. It appears the no's prevail, and the 
amendment is not agreed to.
    Thank the gentlelady.
    With that the eighth amendment on the roster is an 
amendment offered by the gentlelady from Illinois, Ms. Biggert. 
Ms. Biggert, are you ready to proceed with your amendment?
    Ms. Biggert. Yes, I am, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment 
at the desk.
    Chairman Baird. The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 096, amendment to the Committee 
Print offered by Mrs. Biggert of Illinois.
    Chairman Baird. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 
the reading.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    And I recognize the gentlelady for five minutes to explain 
her amendment.
    Ms. Biggert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My amendment is very 
straightforward. It proposes to reduce the funding level for 
the Office of Science by roughly two to three percent from the 
proposed levels in the underlying text with proportional 
changes to the set-asides for each prescribed sub program.
    And, you know, I have long supported and will continue to 
support opportunities to enhance the mission of the Office of 
Science and the funding to support that mission. In fact, every 
year I lead a letter to appropriators that request increased 
funding levels for the Office of Science, consistant with 
COMPETES. This year we had over 40 signatures for the fiscal 
year 2011, request for the Office of Science at $5.12 billion 
and which also is the Administration's request for the year 
2011.
    And I would like to ask unanimous consent to enter a copy 
of that letter into the record.
    Chairman Baird. Without objection.
    Ms. Biggert. Thank you.
    Ms. Biggert. However, Mr. Chairman, consider the country's 
economic state and the recent infusion from the America 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act to the Office of Science, I 
thought we could find more reasonable authorizing levels for 
the Office of Science as we work to craft a new COMPETES bill. 
And, again, this would be at the Administration's level.
    I believe that we can support and work with the Office of 
Science with the proposed changes in my amendment, and thank 
you for calling this subcommittee markup this morning, and I am 
very pleased to be a sponsor of this bill. I just think that we 
are spending too much across the board, and this would be--help 
to reduce this--the spending and move forward with our economy.
    So--and I thank you for having the opportunity to work with 
you to reauthorize the Office of Science, and I would yield 
back.
    Chairman Baird. I thank the gentlelady for her amendment, 
and I thank the gentlelady for her input. This is one of those 
cases where I suppose if all across the board all other 
committees would agree to the relevance of a cut for them, the 
context would be different, but I still maintain the point I 
made with Mr. Neugebauer earlier. The Rising Above the 
Gathering Storm report, as you know, called for a doubling over 
time, and the premise was that we are falling behind some of 
our economic and potentially strategic competitors as well, and 
if we continue to fall behind, we will never catch up. And that 
is not a position we want, and the driver of our economy over 
the last few decades has largely been technological innovation, 
and this is an area where we urgently need it.
    So though I am sympathetic and I would not be surprised if 
the actual appropriations don't match the authorized levels, 
giving that amount of imprimatur that we believe there is merit 
to increasing spending in this area as an investment by the 
American people is, I think, appropriate in this case.
    I will be happy--
    Ms. Biggert. Will the gentleman--
    Chairman Baird. Yes. I will be happy to yield to Ms. 
Biggert, then I will recognize the Chairman.
    Ms. Biggert. Thank you.
    Chairman Baird. Mr. Chairman, I will yield to Ms. Biggert 
and then I will recognize you for five minutes.
    Mr. Gordon. Okay. Perfect time.
    Ms. Biggert. I think the--because of the Stimulus, which 
was $16 billion coming in, which was, I think, you know, a God-
send to the Department of Energy and to the Office of Science 
and really shows a commitment to answering the, you know, the 
rising tide, and I really, you know, believe that we--and have 
always supported doubling the Office of Science, and I think we 
worked on that starting in 2005. We always have a few setbacks, 
but I do think that to drop it by--would end up to be, I think, 
a $1 billion cut, would really show that we can do this and yet 
not break the bank.
    Chairman Baird. I thank the gentlelady.
    The Chairman is recognized for five minutes.
    Mr. Gordon. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Let me make a couple of points. First of all, Rising Above 
the Gathering Storm did recommend that we double the funding in 
this area. They didn't really say over what period of time. 
Many of us wanted it to be over a seven year period, others 
wanted it longer. We wound up doing it at a 10-year period just 
to try to be more frugal during this period.
    That is one point. Another point that I would make is that, 
again, this is an authorization rather than an appropriation, 
and I think it does make sense to have a little more 
flexibility in the authorization level in case there was some 
kind of an emergency that came up or some kind of breakthrough 
since we are talking about, you know, a few years here.
    With that said, I think that as we get to the final, to the 
Full Committee markup, there may be some reductions down. 
Again, I don't want to leave anything on the table in the 
future if we need to have some increases, but also there is no 
need making it unnecessarily combative or unnecessarily 
controversial by having unrealistically-high numbers.
    But would I would suggest is that we adjust it across the 
board and that we wait until the Full Committee so that we can 
look at it in context to all of the various agencies.
    And I yield back my time. Thank you.
    Ms. Biggert. Will the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Gordon. I will regain my time, and yes, I will--
    Ms. Biggert. Would you--would the gentleman be willing to 
work with me--
    Mr. Gordon. Absolutely. Absolutely. I think we need to look 
at this, I mean, and you are someone who wants to look at it, 
you know, in a positive, constructive way. Again, let us try to 
not leave anything on the table, as I say, in case there is an 
emergency in the future, but at the same time let us not give 
unnecessary heartburn by making authorizations that are--we all 
know would be unreasonable to ever meet.
    I would be happy to continue to work with you, and again, 
in the full context of the America COMPETES Bill as we go to 
the final--to the full committee markup.
    Ms. Biggert. Then I would be willing to withdraw my 
amendment.
    Chairman Baird. I thank the gentlelady, and I concur with 
the Chairman.
    Dr. Bartlett, you wanted to be recognized though the 
amendment is withdrawn, but I will still out of courtesy and 
respect allow you to speak.
    Mr. Bartlett. Thank you very much. As everyone knows I have 
been a very strong supporter of basic and applied research and 
the Office of Science, and I wanted to make a couple comments 
relative to the ARPA-E.
    I hope that we will be able to use far more money than that 
to authorize the bill for ARPA-E, but I am not certain, and my 
concern is I don't know how rapidly they can responsibly grow 
this program. Ramping up to $1 billion over-by the way, I hope 
that it can be more than that because as you know, I believe 
that our country faces some huge--the world and our country 
faces some huge challenges in energy, and I would like to see 
even more than this amount of money profitably, effectively 
used, but I am not sure they can do that.
    What kind of oversight can we have so that we can redirect 
this funding in future years, if, in fact, they are not able to 
responsibly let grants and contracts in these amounts? I just 
don't want that money to be there and they have the rush at the 
end of the year to spend it all, and it won't be spent 
productively.
    Will we have adequate oversight opportunities so that we 
can modify the--I would like to up them, by the way. I would 
like them to have a lot of unfunded projects that were very 
meritorious so the next year we can have more money for this. 
Do we have opportunities to do that?
    If so, I am okay with these funding levels. If not, I am 
somewhat squeamish about them because I don't want them to have 
huge amounts of money that they cannot responsibly use.
    Chairman Baird. Mr. Bartlett, if you will yield.
    Mr. Bartlett. I will be happy to.
    Chairman Baird. I may--if counsel can remember the numbers 
off the top of his head I will ask them or perhaps the Chairman 
does, my understanding of the ARPA-E fund, and of course, that 
is not the topic right here of Ms. Biggert's amendment, but I 
believe they had 3,700 applications for the initial round of 
ARPA-E grants, knock that down to what was it, 140 and then 
further knock that--does counsel remember these numbers off the 
top of their head?
    Counsel. It was 3,700 applications. It was then knocked 
down in the next round to roughly 300, and then the final 
awards were 37.
    Chairman Baird. Okay. So they--so very--there were a lot 
more applicants and when I--they were very rigorous, and to 
their credit they turned it around faster with, I think, 
tremendously distinguished people on the review panel to get 
these things moving.
    So the gentleman's point, unlike sometimes we hear federal 
agencies going out and almost creating projects to spend the 
money, here it was the reverse. They had enough applicants that 
they were actually rejecting very worthwhile applications, and 
then they moved them to later rounds.
    But I share the gentleman's concern. I think in the case of 
ARPA-E we actually see an abundance of opportunities that are 
actually--we would like to meet but we don't have resources 
for.
    Mr. Gordon. Would the gentleman yield?
    Chairman Baird. I would be happy to.
    Mr. Gordon. Again, this is an authorization rather than an 
appropriation, and so what we are doing is giving flexibility, 
and I am right in sync with your comments.
    Let me give you some maybe feeling of comfort in that this 
committee I would hope every year is going to call ARPA-E 
before it to have it be accountable and to monitor it. So, yes, 
we will be watching them every year and making sure that they 
are spending it properly.
    And then this, again, this is an authorization that if, you 
know, you in the future think that they are doing terrific and 
need more, then you have room for them. If you think, well, and 
we will tell that to the appropriator, if with reviewing what 
they are doing you think that it is not being done responsibly, 
then you can go to the appropriators and say, we have had this 
review, and we think that they need to be held a little more in 
check.
    So I think what we are trying to do here is accomplish 
exactly what you want, and that yearly monitoring will help to 
do that.
    Mr. Bartlett. I appreciate that. Thank you very much.
    Ms. Biggert. Will the gentleman yield?
    Mr. Bartlett. I will be happy to yield.
    Ms. Biggert. I just want to correct the record for 
something I said as far as the Stimulus that the Office of 
Science received. Not $16 billion but $1.6 billion. It would 
have been nice if they had received the $16 billion, but I want 
to make sure that that is corrected.
    Chairman Baird. I thank the gentlelady. These orders of 
magnitude problems we are having today.
    I thank the gentlelady and thank the gentleman for his 
comments.
    The amendment having been withdrawn but with the proviso 
that we are happy to discuss the issue further between now and 
the final markup we now proceed to the ninth amendment. The 
ninth amendment on the roster is an amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Florida, Mr. Diaz-Balart. Are you ready to 
proceed with your amendment?
    Mr. Diaz-Balart. Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I 
hope that this amendment is one of the categories of trying to 
avoid unnecessary--
    Chairman Baird. Would the gentleman suspend for one moment? 
The clerk has a report.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 019, amendment to the committee 
print, offered by Mr. Mario Diaz-Balart of Florida.
    Chairman Baird. Now, the gentleman may proceed.
    Mr. Diaz-Balart. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I hope this is 
a--
    Chairman Baird. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 
the reading. Without objection, so ordered. Now, the gentleman 
can proceed.
    Mr. Diaz-Balart. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I hope this is 
one of the amendments to avoid unnecessary heartburn category. 
I really do.
    Look, I just--let me first put a couple things in 
perspective. In 2011, the budget that was submitted by the 
President is $3.8 trillion. The revenues, unfortunately, are 
$2.6 trillion. Now, that is followed by a budget of $3.6 
trillion, with revenues of $2.4 trillion.
    The committee print before us authorizes over $40 billion 
over five years. So, let us go over some of the spending 
details. In the first year, funding of the bill, it recommends 
funding the Office of Science at 21 percent, or $1.1 billion 
above the Administration's own request.
    Now, you know, one can criticize the President for a lot of 
things, but nobody has criticized the President for not 
spending enough money. And I am not, I mean, I think so. I 
mean, I think, that would be an unfair statement to criticize 
him for that. So, this is above the President's recommendation. 
ARPA-E, which was funded in the stimulus Act, as Mrs. Biggert 
mentioned, and I mean, which is really a new program, the bill 
more than triples its funding over five years, triples it, and 
it extends it through 2020 with, ``such sums as necessary.''
    The third part, the Energy Innovation Hubs, another new 
program, is being, that is being pursued by the Administration, 
and which appears, frankly, to be similar to the same 
technology efforts that we are already funding at DOE, is 
created, and would double in funding, double in funding over 
five years.
    Again, all this amounts to over $40 billion. Perspective. 
The State of Florida, one of the most populous states in the 
entire country, their entire budget last year was $66 billion. 
Just to put it in perspective.
    Now, perhaps most remarkable is that this bill is only one 
of three bills that will be merged together in an overall 
authorization package. So, this represents just the tip of the 
iceberg, when it comes to new spending authorization in the 
America Competes Act.
    Now, again, I am not criticizing the merits, at all, but we 
can't think of this in a vacuum. This amendment would do the 
following. It would simply strike the out year funding. It 
doesn't reduce the funding authorization in the first three 
years. It would just strike the out year funding to make it a 
three year authorization, which by the way, is consistent with 
the original America COMPETES bill.
    This is not--I am not inventing this. This is not a hostile 
amendment at all. Again, and I am not talking about the merits. 
What does that mean? That we would have to revisit the issue 
and then decide what the level should be. And again, we might 
decide that it should be even more if, you know, the economy is 
doing great, and the deficits are lower and, you know, we might 
want to authorize a lot more. It would just force us to look at 
the issue in three years. That is all this would do.
    This would allow our committee to conduct even more 
effective oversight over the entire Competes program, and then, 
come back in three years and review it. So, all I am asking is 
to give us, to make us review it in three years, and figure out 
where we are.
    Most importantly, this amendment would obviously, then, 
reduce the authorized spending in this bill by $18 billion, and 
then, we would have to re-look at it.
    Now, this Congress, and this Administration, frankly, we 
need to kind of just try to bring a little bit of sanity, let 
us at least force ourselves to look at it in three years, and 
then we will, we can decide to do what we want to do.
    Again, perspective. According to the CBO, the President's 
budget raises the deficit to a record $1.5 trillion in 2010, 
and debt held by the public grows to $9.2 trillion this year, 
with no end in sight. And this bill goes above, above the 
President's recommended levels.
    Again, all I am asking, just, as the chairman said, because 
it doesn't, you know, nobody can say it cuts the program, it 
just forces us to look at it in three years. That is it. That 
is all this does.
    So, I am asking for a favorable vote, and I hope that it is 
taken, again, in, with the intent that it is. Just, let us just 
kind of, to avoid the heartburn, the chairman said, let us try 
to just look at it again in three years. Let us, give us that 
opportunity, and that is all the amendment does, Mr. Chairman. 
Thank you.
    Chairman Baird. Thank the gentleman. I, having served with 
the gentleman on the Budget Committee, we don't want to 
necessarily replicate all those discussions. I would just point 
out, for the record, that when President Clinton left office, 
the budget deficit was actually a surplus of $200 billion. At 
the final years of the President Bush Administration, the last 
budget for which he was accountable, the deficit stood at $1.3 
trillion. During that interim, much of which was controlled by 
the Republican House and Senate, the federal debt doubled. The 
borrowing from foreign countries doubled. And our dependence on 
Chinese money more than doubled.
    And I would also say that if you look at the Clinton years, 
much of the economic expansion resulted from technological 
developments that increased productivity, and part of what we 
are trying to do here is promote technological innovation.
    Chairman Gordon wanted to be recognized. In a moment, I 
will recognize Mr. Gordon.
    Mr. Gordon. Well, you know, I don't know that this is the 
place that we need to recap all of our past sins. There is 
plenty of blame to go around in terms of the debt. We are where 
we are now. I certainly agree that innovation will help us get 
out.
    And my friend from Florida, we are, again, I am sympathetic 
with much of what he says. Let me just sort of point out a 
couple of things. Reducing a five year authorization to a three 
year authorization doesn't save you any money in those first 
three years. So, you know, it is a little bit of apples and 
oranges.
    We don't have to wait to the end of either three or five to 
reauthorize. And as I said to Dr. Bartlett earlier, I hope that 
this committee, every year, is going to be reviewing these 
programs, and I hope, if they deserve it, you will give them 
more. If they don't deserve it, you will reduce them. And so, I 
think that will be a part of, you know, your responsibility.
    And I would also say the same thing that I said to Mrs. 
Biggert, and as you caught on, and I think very well, also. 
Again, we don't want to be inflammatory here. I mean, there is, 
you know, I don't want to leave anything on the table, but I 
don't want to make your heartburn any more than necessary.
    So, why don't we look at this in the full context, you 
know. We probably still won't get to where you are, but 
hopefully, we will make you feel a little bit better. But let 
us look at it in the full context of this full America COMPETES 
bill, would be my recommendation.
    Chairman Baird. Dr. Bartlett wanted to be recognized.
    Mr. Bartlett. I want to concur with the gentleman's concern 
about our spending. There are few Members of the Congress who 
more consistently vote against spending than I do. The walls of 
my office are filled with awards as a testament to how 
consistently I vote against spending, but I would like to 
exempt two things from that, from those concerns.
    One is basic research. We spend less and less each year on 
basic research. That is exactly the equivalent of the farmer 
eating his seed corn. I have a lot of farmers. They aren't dumb 
enough to do that. We are doing that in our country and in our 
Congress today. So, I would like to really increase funding 
there.
    The second place I would like to exempt is anything that 
has to do with energy. Every 12 days, the world uses a billion 
barrels of oil. Now, that stuns many people to know that. It is 
84 million barrels a day. A little more than that now, 
actually, and that 84 goes into 1,000 about 12 times, so that 
means that every 12 days, we use a billion barrels of oil.
    We have 1.2 trillion barrels of oil, easy arithmetic, about 
at the sixth grade level, we have 40 years of oil left. Now, we 
are going to find more oil, but we would sure as heck like to 
use more oil. So would the Chinese and the Indians and a lot of 
developing nations.
    And if we are going to be more than lucky, if the more oil 
we find is more than the additional oil we would like to use. 
So, we are stuck with 40 years of oil. Almost nobody 
understands the urgency of this situation.
    So, you know, I really want to be, to cut drastically. We 
need to. Now, I have 10 kids, 17 grandkids, and two great 
grandkids, and I fully mortgaged the future of my kids and my 
grandkids, and now, we are working on my two great grandkids. 
So, you know, but I just think we need more money for basic 
research, and we need a hugely increased amount of money 
effectively spent on energy.
    So, although I concur with his overall concerns about 
spending, I would like to exempt these two areas, if I might. 
Thank you.
    Chairman Baird. Thank you, Dr. Bartlett. Ms. Giffords.
    Ms. Giffords. Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to add in there, 
as a proud co-sponsor of the Energy Innovation Hubs, that we 
are not creating new government labs that are going to be 
forever dependent. In fact, we are looking at a proven model. 
This is tried and true. Some of the examples include Bell 
Laboratories, Lincoln Lab as well.
    I appreciate the comments made by Mr. Bartlett about our 
dependence on foreign energy, and it is precisely those 
concerns that are leading us to really innovate around these 
programs.
    Again, this is a maximum five year program. At that point, 
they need to be looked at and reexamined again, but it is 
really an opportunity for us to be innovative. So, I mean, I 
certainly understand and hear the concerns that are being 
spoken about, but I think the promise of what we are going to 
see out of the best and brightest in these Energy Innovation 
Hubs is pretty exciting stuff. And it is something that this 
committee has always been for, and we have advocated for. And 
frankly, the purpose of this committee is to get out in front 
of where those pockets of promise exist in our Federal 
Government.
    Thank you.
    Chairman Baird. Mr., anyone wish to be recognized on the 
minority side? Mr. Garamendi.
    Mr. Garamendi. I really want to echo and expand on the 
comments of Dr. Bartlett. And I am going to back to a little 
history. Back in the '70s, we decided to become energy 
independent, and we did it for about three or four years, and 
then we let it go, and we went back to oil. And here we are, 
once again, in a similar situation.
    We have to have a very long-term view of this, and we 
cannot start and stop. We have five years. Better, this should 
be a 25 year program, and this is on the research, but we also 
need the implementation of that research. Because Dr. Bartlett 
is quite correct. We got a real serious global problem here, 
and that will manifest itself not only in climate change, if 
you believe in that. But it is certainly going to manifest 
itself in troubles between nations, who are vying for the 
available energy supplies. And we have already seen that. A lot 
of what is going on in the world today is directly on that.
    It is, this is our opportunity on the research side, the 
scientific side, to really get ahead of the game, and we need a 
very, very long-term view of this. Three years, two years, that 
is a short time. And the problem here is the research is long-
lasting. It takes a long time to get that research out there. 
So, we start today on some research, and then, it may be three, 
four, five, or 20 years before that research manifests itself 
in a solution to an extraordinary, serious problem for this 
globe.
    So, we need to have that long-term view, and with regard to 
the money, it is not a matter of throwing money at it, it is a 
matter of making the money available with the authorization, 
making the overall potential available, and then, the 
appropriators every year will do their thing. And hopefully, 
their thing will be a lot of money into this, but if we don't 
authorize it, they cannot appropriate it.
    And so, we need to really be, I think, very thoughtful, 
longitudinal, that is, a long view, and we ought to have the 
potential there, and every year, the appropriators coming in, 
and hopefully, maximizing the potential, maximizing the money 
for this potential.
    The other thing is the role of this committee and 
oversight. It is extraordinarily important that the oversight 
take place.
    Thank you.
    Chairman Baird. Thank the gentleman. I think the general 
concern about fiscal responsibility and this spending has been 
heard well. I think it is shared by both sides of the aisle.
    Mr. Gordon has talked about working with Ms. Biggert to 
lower, possibly, the authorization levels. I would share my 
commitment to that. The one thing I would say about shortening 
the duration is, having talked with a lot of federal agencies, 
especially if you take a program like the Hubs or others, the 
ideas, as Ms. Giffords pointed out, if you are trying to make 
an investment, people need, they need some reliability of 
funding.
    You know, like businesses are always coming to us and 
saying if you are going to change the tax code one way or 
another, we can't make the investments. Perhaps a lower 
authorization level in some of these areas, but shortening 
that, people will say well, I am not sure we are going to have 
the funding two years from now. They can't, you know, if you 
want to bring a top flight scientist on, and say, we want you 
to work on this major project for us, but we are not really 
sure we will have funding next year, the scientist is going to 
pass. If you say five years, and that is sort of how Bell Labs, 
it is how DARPA works, et cetera, and so, that is the 
rationale.
    And so, I appreciate the gentleman's underlying concern. I 
know he has expressed it well and often, about the level of 
federal spending. I share that concern, but perhaps, a better 
way to deal with it is through an approach that tries to meet 
halfway with Ms. Biggert's approach there, rather than the 
shortening of the term.
    So, if there is not further discussion, we will call the 
amendment. All those in favor will say aye. Those opposed, no. 
No. The no's have it. The amendment is not agreed to.
    We now proceed to the tenth amendment on the roster, an 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Maryland, Dr. Bartlett. 
Dr. Bartlett, the clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 019, amendment to the committee 
print, offered by Mr. Bartlett of Maryland.
    Chairman Baird. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 
the reading. Without objection, so ordered. I recognize the 
gentleman for five minutes to explain the amendment.
    Mr. Bartlett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have decided to 
withdraw the amendment that I was to offer this morning.
    A few weeks ago, my staff met with the chief scientist and 
executive of a small company that is developing innovative 
energy technology. They learned of the opportunity to respond 
too late, so they couldn't respond. They shared with us a 
disappointing observation concerning the management of ARPA-E.
    As we know, DOE was under tremendous political pressure 
from the White House to spend the stimulus money appropriated 
for ARPA-E as fast as possible, though Congress didn't confirm 
ARPA-E's Director until the first tranche of awards was 
announced.
    These scientists observed what GAO has repeatedly found, 
and this is the GAO report, not us saying this. Among federal 
departments and agencies, DOE has, in their words, ``a 
notoriously poor record for managing its funds and staff 
resources to achieve its chartered goals.''
    The purpose of my amendment was to set aside 30 percent of 
the funding for small business in ARPA-E, was to help ARPA-E, 
as it stands up, to achieve Congress' intent of supporting 
breakthroughs in technology.
    A bit more than half of all of the employees in America 
work for small businesses, and considerably more than half of 
all the creativity and innovation comes from small business. 
So, I thought that 30 percent was a modest set-aside for small 
business.
    I would appreciate a commitment from the chairman to 
explore in more detail, before the full committee markup, how 
to help ARPA-E direct a comparable percentage of its awards to 
small business.
    Chairman Baird. I appreciate the gentleman's intent. A 
strong advocate of small business. I share that intent, and I 
share the gentleman's observation that often, the most 
innovative things come from small business.
    My understanding is, ARPA-E statistics suggest 43 percent 
of the first round of awards actually did go to small business. 
So, we are--
    Mr. Bartlett. If the gentleman would yield.
    Chairman Baird. Would be happy to.
    Mr. Bartlett. That is true, and I just want that to 
continue. That is not their history. Their history is, and you 
know, I worked for government, and I worked for captive 
government contractors, and I worked for big industry. I was 
IBM Federal System Division for a long, for eight years. So, I 
have been on both sides of that equation, and I know how easy 
it is to continue giving money to the guy you know.
    Joe submitted a really good proposal, but gee, I know Sam, 
and Sam performs pretty well for me, and I am going to be 
graded on how well my contractors perform. I am going to give 
this to Sam, even though Joe's proposal looks better than 
Sam's.
    I know that history, and I know that this is what the 
Department of Energy has been doing. And I just want to make 
sure that they continue this good performance. They are now at 
43, I would like them not to slip below 30. So, let us talk 
about it before it--
    Chairman Baird. If the gentleman would yield, the reason 
that ARPA-E is set up the way it is, it is different. We all 
recognize those type of problems within the Department of 
Energy. This is not an old program. This is a year-old program 
that is trying to break the mold. And we are trying to give 
them the tools to be nimble and be flexible, and to break those 
molds. I think they are doing a good job, and I hope that there 
will be a role model, not only for the rest of the Department 
of Energy, but you know, for Federal Government in general. 
And--
    Mr. Bartlett. I just want to make sure this good 
performance continues.
    Chairman Baird. I agree with, I share that. I would just 
say I hope we can also do, encourage ARPA-E to do another 
summit next year, wherein the various vendors display their 
wares. I don't know if you got to go it, Dr. Bartlett. Knowing 
your passion for this, you would have been like a kid in a 
candy store there. The diversity of approaches that were being 
modeled, many of them from small startup business, a few from 
the large players, but was really, truly inspiring. I 
absolutely share your commitment. I appreciate the withdrawal 
of the amendment, and as the chairman mentioned earlier, we 
intend to follow through in our oversight responsibility every 
year, and this a question we should ask ARPA-E when they come 
back. Is keep us updated on the statistics of small business.
    With the amendment is withdrawn. Please.
    Mr. Lujan. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would yield.
    Chairman Baird. Well, I will recognize Mr. Lujan. I will 
recognize Mr. Lujan.
    Mr. Lujan. Just as we proceed in making sure that we are 
able to retain the support for small business. I think this is 
an excellent point to bring forward, that we do not lose sight 
with some of the awards, with the attention to women-held 
businesses, veteran owned businesses, and minority businesses 
as well, and that we take that into consideration as we talk 
about this, as well. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Baird. Appropriately enough, the next amendment is 
the eleventh amendment on the roster. An amendment offered by 
the gentleman from New Mexico, Mr. Lujan.
    Mr. Lujan, are you ready to proceed with your amendment?
    Mr. Lujan. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
    Chairman Baird. The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 042, amendment to the committee 
print, offered by Mr. Lujan of New Mexico.
    Chairman Baird. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 
the reading. Without objection, so ordered. I recognize the 
gentleman from New Mexico for five minutes to explain his 
amendment.
    Mr. Lujan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and appreciate this 
time, and appreciate the discussion today with Ranking Member 
Inglis, Chairman Gordon, for his work on ARPA-E.
    Our country is changing the way that we use and consume 
energy, and Congress and our President have committed to 
investing in the new development of energy technologies that 
will reduce our dependency on foreign oil, improve energy 
efficiency, and create a robust energy workforce.
    ARPA-E brings together a diverse community of energy 
researchers from the National Laboratories, universities, 
investor and commercial communities to develop cutting edge 
technologies that will help solve our energy problems. The 
ARPA-E reauthorization of 2010 adds a new goal to ARPA-E, of 
promoting the commercial application of advanced energy 
technologies. This is critically important, as the new 
scientific discoveries and technological innovations won't 
improve the Nation's energy security unless they are matured 
into commercial applications.
    My amendment today supports this goal by increasing the 
minimum percentage of funds that are to be used for ARPA-E's 
technology transfer activities from 2.5 percent to five 
percent. Although my amendment strengthens the minimum 
percentage, it is still a small overall percentage for a 
program that should be promoting, accelerating, and engaging 
private entities, so that new technological innovations can be 
deployed.
    Furthermore, it clarifies that such technology transfer 
funds should be used within the responsibilities of program 
directors, mainly for identifying mechanisms for commercial 
application, a successful energy technology development 
projects, including through establishments of partnerships 
between awardee and commercial entities.
    The movement of technology from basic research to industry 
application supports economic growth and creates jobs. America 
is positioned to be a leader in tech transfer and 
commercialization, but we must encourage and incentivize and 
invest in technology transfer activities.
    I ask my colleagues to support my amendment, and I thank 
you for your consideration. I yield back.
    Chairman Baird. I thank the gentleman. Does anyone else 
wish to be recognized? Dr. Bartlett.
    Mr. Bartlett. Mr. Chairman, this is not a role that DARPA, 
that DARPA plays. And I am wondering, if we can have a set 
aside for this, why can't we have a set aside for small 
business?
    And then, I would like to ask a couple specific questions 
about some of the wording in there. The key phrases in the 
underlying bill language are promoting commercial applications, 
and identifying mechanisms for partnerships.
    I had some concern about what these two words mean. 
Promoting sounds like it could be anything, from direct funding 
to put a product on the shelf, to marketing type activities. 
Either way, if not bounded in some way, it sounds like a blank 
check for potentially inappropriate activities.
    It is the same story with mechanisms. What mechanisms does 
the majority have in mind? The bottom line is that if an 
awardee has developed a useful and valuable technology, the 
market will create a natural partnership with the awardee. What 
is bothersome is that one can envision the government using 
inappropriate pressure as one of its mechanisms in this 
context.
    I don't think it is crazy to imagine DOE using its 
considerable contracting and even regulatory leverage to force 
partnerships. I was wondering about my concern for what these 
two words really mean.
    Mr. Lujan. If the gentleman would yield.
    Mr. Bartlett. Be happy to.
    Mr. Lujan. Mr. Chairman, if you look at the enabling 
legislation of ARPA-E, which is where I am amending, it is 
built into the allocation portion, which is under section 5(d), 
which states at least 2.5 percent of the amount shall be used 
for tech transfer and outreach activities. This is already in 
there, and as with DARPA, when we talk about the technological 
advances that have spinoff capabilities, that are making their 
way to market, we should be looking to create stronger 
programs, even in DARPA, to push these out with these out with 
our Air Force research labs or Army research labs.
    Now, also in the enabling language, under section 2 of 
ARPA-E, when we look at ``identifying and promoting 
revolutionary advances in fundamental sciences, translating 
scientific discoveries and cutting edge inventions, and to 
technological innovations, and accelerating transformational 
technological advances in areas that the industry, by itself, 
is not likely to undertake, because of technical or financial 
uncertainty.'' I think it is an enabling legislation, when we 
talk about financial uncertainty about moving this forward.
    Furthermore, when we heard from the Chamber of Commerce, 
which I know is a strong advocate of creating jobs, they also 
highlighted, that when possible, this committee, when providing 
testimony to us on January 20, Mr. Donohue: ``The committee 
should look at incentives that lead to public/private 
partnerships, the commercialization of new technologies, and 
regional STEM initiatives. This information ecosystem drives 
job creation, economic development, and regional stability that 
will contribute to regaining America's lead in the global 
innovation market.''
    When we talk about COMPETES, I think that is what we are 
trying to achieve here, and we should look at creating these 
programs and expanding them, as opposed to depressing them and 
eliminating them.
    Mr. Bartlett. Thank you for your comments. I have 
familiarity with DARPA for many, many years. And ordinarily, 
DARPA ceases its involvement quite a long while before it 
enters the marketplace.
    They are there to provide funds for proof-of-principle, for 
ideas that industry can't support, because they are just too 
iffy, or there is too much risk involved, and that is the role 
that they play.
    I am not arguing that this shouldn't be done. I was just 
saying that we are now going further than DARPA does, and ARPA-
E, if we are including this, because this is not a role that--I 
agree that this needs to be done, and if we want to make ARPA-E 
something different than something modeled after DARPA, then 
that is fine.
    I was just noting the inconsistency was all. Thank you very 
much.
    Chairman Baird. Further discussion? Mr. Inglis.
    Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In terms of promotion 
of ARPA-E, I would point out that, as I am seeing, there are 
3,700 applications and 37 awards for the first year of 
operation.
    So, it seems like it is well promoted. First round, yeah. 
First round.
    Mr. Gordon. If the gentleman would yield, it also says 
``and technology transfer,'' so it is not limited to promotion.
    Mr. Inglis. So, how do we make sure that it is not, we 
don't go spending a great deal of money, though, on promotion, 
rather than. In other words, it seems like it is well promoted; 
it is obviously working quite well. If you get 3,700 
applications for 37 awards.
    Mr. Gordon. This was, I think, put in at your request. I 
mean, this was, it is technology transfer also. So, this is not 
going to promotion. These are scientists. You know, I think 
they want to spend money, you know, they want the rubber to 
meet the road. They are not interested in, I think, a lot of 
hoopla. So, I don't think we have to worry about that.
    Mr. Inglis. So, that being the case, what if we took out 
promotion? Maybe the gentleman can consider a friendly 
amendment. Just take out the word promotion, and leave it at 
tech transfer or something.
    Chairman Baird. Would the gentleman yield for two points?
    Mr. Inglis. Yeah. I would be glad to.
    Chairman Baird. First, and I will let the gentleman speak 
to his amendment in just a moment. Well, I won't--you will have 
to yield, but two points.
    One, a fundamental difference between ARPA-E and DARPA that 
came up repeatedly in the hearings we had here and in multiple 
conversations elsewhere I have had, is that DARPA has a 
guaranteed market. The Pentagon basically says you make this, 
we buy it, and we don't have that market, guaranteed market, in 
the area of energy.
    And so, the premise was that you need to do more to make 
sure that these things actually cross the Valley of Death kind 
of bottleneck Ms. Biggert talked about. So, that would be, just 
the first is the principle that DARPA and ARPA-E are not going 
to be perfectly congruent in their function, because there is 
not the guaranteed marketplace within DARPA.
    The second thing is more of a procedural matter, in terms 
of, I think, this would not be a friendly, it might be a pretty 
complex friendly amendment. We would have to ask the clerk 
about it. Well, I am not sure you even want to make it, but 
so--
    Mr. Inglis. I am withdrawing my friendly amendment request, 
Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Baird. Is there further discussion?
    Hearing none, the motion occurs on, the vote occurs on the 
amendment. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Those opposed, no. 
The ayes have it, the amendment is agreed to.
    The twelfth amendment on the roster is an amendment offered 
by the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Inglis. Mr. Inglis, 
are you ready to proceed with your amendment?
    Mr. Inglis. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Baird. The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 024, amendment to the committee 
print, offered by Mr. Inglis of South Carolina.
    Chairman Baird. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 
the reading. Without objection, so ordered. I recognize the 
gentleman from South Carolina for five minutes to explain his 
amendment.
    Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    This amendment is consistent with some comments that I had 
at the beginning of ARPA-E. And when we started ARPA-E, my 
concern was, and other people's concern was that the Office of 
Science would be harmed by the establishment of ARPA-E. In 
other words, funds would be siphoned off from the Office of 
Science and directed to ARPA-E. And that gets back to this 
question. We were discussing here several different ways today 
about whether we want to preserve the basic science at the 
Office of Science.
    And so, back then, what I proposed was that we not allow 
any funding for ARPA-E, unless the Office of Science kept pace 
with inflation in its funding. And so, what I am proposing here 
today is something very similar to that, and that is sort of 
establish a floor for the funding for Office of Science, such 
that it gets inflationary increases, and as long as it gets 
those, then ARPA-E may move up, but if Office of Science 
doesn't get an inflationary increase, then ARPA-E is held at 
this, the initial number, which is $300 million.
    So, that is the concept of this amendment, is basically, to 
preserve funding for Office of Science, and see that it doesn't 
compete against ARPA-E funding.
    So, I would urge you to support the amendment.
    Chairman Baird. Thank the gentleman. The Chairman is 
recognized.
    Mr. Gordon. Mr. Inglis made this suggestion, this amendment 
during the original authorization last time, and it was 
accepted.
    But I would say to him that that was because it was a new 
program, and we wanted to make sure, again, it wasn't going to 
cannibalize other things. I think we are seeing wide support 
for the Office of Science.
    I would also say that I think ARPA-E is basic research in 
many ways, and that it is not counter to other things. I would 
just say this, that in keeping our ability to have flexibility 
in the future, we might find that there are some areas in the 
Office of Science that aren't doing as good as they should be 
doing, and that might be, and that they might come down.
    But if ARPA-E is doing a terrific job, then it would be, I 
think, not wise to have them penalized, because someone else 
was not doing well. So, again, I think it just takes away the 
flexibility. It was a worthwhile and accepted amendment the 
first time out, but now, we have a proven program, and I don't 
think that it would be beneficial.
    Chairman Baird. Ms. Biggert is recognized.
    Ms. Biggert. Thank you. I would support this amendment, and 
I think that along with Mr. Inglis, I was always concerned 
about the takeover of funding from the Office of Science to 
provide for ARPA-E, and I think what the Chairman just said is 
reminiscent of the conversation we have just had with Mr. 
Ehlers' amendment, with the markers for the three types of 
research in the Office of Science.
    So, I think that it was a very important distinction, when 
we first passed the COMPETES Act, and this was so important, I 
think, to this side of the aisle, that there was, that this 
would not affect the Office of Science, and so, I think that we 
should continue it.
    Since we really haven't had more than just the initial 
granting of the ARPA-E technology, or the groups that are going 
to be doing something under ARPA-E.
    Chairman Baird. Gentlelady yield?
    Ms. Biggert. Yes, I will yield.
    Mr. Inglis. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. And to the 
chairman, I would say, point out that actually, that is what we 
would be concerned, is things get so exciting at ARPA-E that 
you forget about Office of Science.
    In other words, it is quite possible for things to get very 
exciting for this quarter. And so, quarterly profits, quarterly 
whatever. This quarter becomes very exciting. Meanwhile, money 
goes toward that excitement, and the basic research that is a 
role, I believe, of the Federal Government, because nobody else 
is going to spend money on that. It is overlooked. That is 
exactly what we are concerned about, actually, is things 
getting too exciting at ARPA-E.
    We want them to be exciting, but we want to make sure that 
we stay excited about really off the beaten path research that 
may turn out to be really game changing in the basic research 
area. So, it is, we are back to that fundamental question that 
we have been discussing all day, I believe.
    It is the gentlelady's time. Do you want to--
    Ms. Biggert. Yes. Yes.
    Mr. Inglis. And thank you to the gentlelady for yielding.
    Ms. Biggert. I will yield back.
    Chairman Baird. I recognize myself for five minutes to ask 
counsel. Could you share with us the current amount of 
authorization for the Office of Basic Science, vis-a-vis the 
current year for ARPA-E, and then the out year numbers?
    Counsel. Sorry, the current year authorization for the DOE 
Office of Science, and the current authorization for ARPA-E?
    Chairman Baird. Correct. Not including the ARRA funds. We 
will get there.
    Counsel. Office of Science is authorized for $5.8 billion 
for 2010. ARPA-E, right now, I believe, is in such sums.
    Chairman Baird. What is the actual expenditure? Again, ARRA 
is a bit of a contaminant there.
    Counsel. $4.9 billion for Financial Year 2010 appropriated 
for Office of Science.
    Chairman Baird. Okay. So, in the out years, as of 2015, 
what is the Office of Science authorization in this legislation 
proposed to you? I think it is $8 billion something.
    Counsel. $8.1 billion.
    Chairman Baird. And what would ARPA-E be?
    Counsel. In 2015, would be $1 billion, I think. Would be $1 
billion, I believe.
    Chairman Baird. So, the reason I ask those, I thank counsel 
for that. The reason I ask those is, we are still seeing a 
rather generous growth in basic science, under the Office of 
Science, under this bill, right? I mean, it is looking, we are 
looking at $2 billion increase during that time period.
    Now, yes, there is enthusiasm for ARPA-E, but it is not at 
the neglect or expense of science. It is maintaining a core 
growth in science, but at the same time, allowing ARPA-E to 
increase. And the only other thing I would say on this is, you 
know, over the 12 years I have been here, it has been a 
pastime, I think, of some of the colleagues on the Minority 
side, particularly, to do reverse earmarking of science 
projects. And the game is often to look at a rather esoteric 
branch of science and say, well, we will take money from this 
and put it toward something that has appeal.
    From the taxpayer's perspective, not to take anything away 
from the Office of Basic Research, but I think from the 
taxpayer's perspective, at a time of record, near-record 
unemployment, dependence on foreign oil, increasing energy 
prices, et cetera et cetera, I think many of the taxpayers 
would say darn straight, I want some of this money, a generous 
portion of this money, to go towards things that fairly in the 
near future, I can actually see a tangible benefit from.
    Not to diminish the importance of basic research, but 
certainly, I think, the taxpayers in my districts are saying 
let us get some jobs. Let us get some things that lower our 
energy costs. Let us get some things that make us economically 
competitive.
    The basic research still grows in this, in this 
legislation. I want to underscore that. But ARPA-E would grow, 
has the authority under this to grow generously. So, with that, 
I would yield back.
    Mr. Inglis. Mr. Chairman, would you yield?
    Chairman Baird. Be happy to.
    Mr. Inglis. My amendment speaks of appropriations, not 
authorization. So, the concern is, I agree with you that based 
on the numbers we just ran through, the appropriations are, the 
authorizations are generous.
    It is just a question about whether the appropriations fall 
short of that authorization is what I am trying to do is 
preserve the Office of Science through the appropriations.
    Chairman Baird. Reclaiming. I would, I recognize and 
respect that, but that, to me, is a further argument. This 
committee believes in the importance of ARPA-E. And I 
personally believe it. I think the evidence is compelling, that 
I don't want to then make ARPA-E's position dependent on an 
appropriator's decision on basic science.
    I think we want to continue to defend our prerogative here 
as far as authorization, rather than making, giving them a way, 
I mean, we are then in a paradoxical position of having to 
plead with them to raise, if we want to deal with fiscal 
issues, to then say we are going to plead with one entity to 
raise one fund, so that another fund can go up. It is not a 
position I, as a supplicant to the appropriators, which we are 
too much anyway, I don't want to do that.
    But I would be happy to yield. I only have 30 seconds left. 
I will yield to Mr. Bartlett, Dr. Bartlett, then Ms. Biggert, 
or I will recognize Ms. Biggert, if Dr. Bartlett--
    Mr. Bartlett. Thank you. When considering the tensions 
implicit in this amendment, I am reminded of the New Testament 
statement: ``This ought you to have done, and not to have left 
the other undone.'' I am a huge supporter of basic research, 
but you know, considering the priorities here, we find 10 
billion barrels of oil, and we heave a sigh of relief, gee, we 
don't need to worry anymore, do we? That lasts the world 120 
days. Big deal.
    So, you know, carrying on to Animal Farm, all animals are 
equal, but some are more equal than others. I think that energy 
research is more equal than others. So, I hope we don't call a 
roll call vote on this, because I am going to be conflicted. I 
am not going to vote against my Ranking Member, but I just, you 
know, I just think that if you are going to favor one side of 
this equation, it needs to be ARPA-E, because I think that is a 
bigger challenge than any other challenge in our society today. 
Thank you.
    Chairman Baird. Thanks, Dr. Bartlett. I always welcome some 
Biblical scripture that has applied relevance to the Committee. 
Dr. Ehlers often provides that with us, for us. Ms. Biggert.
    Ms. Biggert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I think that we are looking at the amendment. It is just to 
make sure that the Office of Science is, the money is 
appropriated and adjusted for inflation, but really, only if 
the amount exceeds the previous fiscal year, then there is no 
cap on what ARPA-E can be. I think it is just a check, to make 
sure that both of these are funded.
    The other thing, we should look at some time, there is 
something in this legislation that allows earmarks to be taken 
out of the Office of Science. I have never been able to figure 
out why that is true, but every year, there are MRIs that come 
out of the Office of Science, because there is a biotech clause 
in there. And I think that this is a way that, you know, that 
we could protect more the Office of Science by doing this, and 
maybe we could do something by the final decision on this bill.
    I mean, I think we should, you know, look at that, rather 
than just making sure that the Office of Science is funded. 
Yield back.
    Chairman Baird. I, given, I thank the gentlelady, and I 
would be happy to discuss with the gentlelady the issue of 
earmarks, and if there is a need to address that in this, I 
would much prefer that we put it in, rather than giving Mr. 
Flake yet another opportunity to do so on the floor.
    Mr. Gordon. Would the gentleman yield?
    Chairman Baird. I would be happy to recognize the chair.
    Mr. Gordon. Ms. Biggert raised that issue with me on the 
floor yesterday. I was surprised to hear it. We have already 
started the process of looking into that, and we all would like 
to see it corrected.
    Chairman Baird. Thank the gentlelady for calling our 
attention to that.
    Is there further discussion on the amendment?
    If not, then the vote occurs on the amendment. Those in 
favor will say aye. Those opposed, no. No. In the opinion of 
the chair, the nos have it. The amendment is not agreed to.
    In the opinion of the chair, Mr. Ehlers needs a hearing 
aid. There are times when there are exceptions to that auditory 
rule, I have noticed, on the floor, particularly.
    The thirteenth amendment on the roster is an amendment 
offered by the gentlelady from Texas, Ms. Johnson. Ms. Johnson, 
are you ready to proceed with your amendment?
    Ms. Johnson. Yes. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I have an amendment at 
the desk.
    Chairman Baird. The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 104, amendment to the committee 
print, offered by Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas.
    Chairman Baird. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 
the reading. Without objection, so ordered, and I recognize the 
gentlelady for five minutes to explain her amendment.
    Ms. Johnson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Ranking 
Member. As newer tools are revolutionizing our energy sector, 
we will be creating an entirely new green economy with jobs for 
workers who have been displaced over the years. Ensuring that 
the people in low income communities and people of color are 
prepared for this transition is critical, not just for these 
citizens, but also, for our country.
    My amendment specifies for one award, to be granted to an 
HBCU or 1890 Land Grant institution, a Hispanic serving 
institution or a PBI or a tribal college. Together, these are 
hundreds of universities, which represent every corner of our 
Nation. My amendment also gives special consideration to at 
least three of these universities, one of each category.
    I would like to thank my good friends and colleagues, 
Representative Bobby Rush and Representative G. K. Butterfield, 
for their hard work on this language, which has broad 
tripartisan support.
    The development of Green Energy Centers of Excellence at 
historically black colleges and universities, Hispanic serving 
institutions, and tribal colleges, to research and develop new 
green technologies, as well as train implementers in the 
deployment of green innovation is a move toward parity in a 
growing clean energy economy.
    These universities maintain unique relationships with 
communities of color, and we should implement their ability to 
educate these communities on the opportunities in green 
industries, and the techniques needed to succeed in a larger 
energy strategy.
    Historically, most historically black colleges and 
universities, and other minority serving institutions do not 
have the same endowments, funding, grant-writing capabilities, 
and luxuries other universities have. Despite these challenges, 
HBCUs have managed to graduate students in STEM fields at a 
higher rate than most traditional universities.
    The faction of college age population ages represented by 
minorities is expected to grow to 55 percent in 2050. However, 
minorities still face barriers pursuing STEM careers. The 
United States will not be able to produce enough scientists and 
engineers in future years who do not address these issues now.
    The proportion of STEM master's degrees earned by 
minorities is much lower than the representation of minorities 
within the U.S. population. In order to keep America 
competitive in future years, we do have some work to do. The 
bills for our consideration today focus on particular 
weaknesses in our national scientific enterprise.
    I, and many of our colleagues from the Tri-Caucus and the 
Diversity and Innovation Caucus, believe this amendment will 
strengthen the intent of this legislation.
    As legislators, we have seen the statistics showing 
minorities are falling behind the rest of the pack in sciences. 
We are now interested in policy directions to correct these 
statistics.
    I ask my colleagues on this committee to support this 
amendment, to increase diversity in our growing clean energy 
economy.
    Mr. Chairman, I have never attended a historically black 
university, nor a minority serving university, but I know what 
it means to this society for them to be operating. I have seen 
far too many successes coming from these universities to ignore 
them. Many of them are first generation students. Many of them 
are very nervous, and cannot really survive on a majority 
campus, because they have not been accustomed to that 
environment.
    So, I would please ask the Committee to help to get these 
students up to par.
    I thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member, and I yield 
back the remainder of the time.
    Chairman Baird. Is there further discussion on the 
amendment? Mr. Inglis.
    Mr. Inglis. Mr. Chairman, I certainly am sympathetic to the 
idea of special consideration, the challenge here is we only 
start out with three Hubs, so if we are going to give special 
consideration to three Hubs, then it pretty quickly becomes 
sort of a suggested number, and it is the entire program.
    So, it seems to me that the wise thing to do is just take 
the number out. If the gentlelady would just take out the, at 
least three awards, does not state a number, but suggests 
special consideration, I think that would be acceptable. It is 
just a special consideration, but when you establish a number, 
especially if it is 100 percent of the number of Hubs, that 
seems problematic.
    And so, thank the--
    Chairman Baird. Would the gentleman yield back?
    Mr. Inglis. I yield back.
    Chairman Baird. Mr. Garamendi.
    Mr. Garamendi. I think the Hubs are not necessarily on one 
campus. I think they can be multiple campuses, or locations. I 
will use the word campus in its broadest sense. It might be a 
research laboratory, it might be a university.
    But if it is a Hub, and I agree with the three issue. I 
think you are correct about that. But it may be that the, that 
instead of the Hub being a single university campus, it may be 
that one or more of the serving institutions may be part of one 
or more Hubs. And I think we just have a little language issue 
here, about what we are actually trying to accomplish. And we 
are trying to spread the Hubs out to these historic serving 
campuses, but not only on that campus.
    Mr. Lujan. If the gentleman would yield. Mr. Chairman, I 
think that Mr. Garamendi describes that precisely the way that 
it would work.
    We worked on similar language during the debate with ACES, 
if the Members will recall, to allow for these partnerships to 
take place as well, and so, although the target wouldn't be 
those campuses, it would be to make sure that these campuses 
would be included in the discussion, and in coming up with the 
solutions necessary to make sure that they are part of the 
solution.
    Chairman Baird. Mr. Garamendi, do you yield back?
    Mr. Garamendi. If I, if the Chair can inquire of counsel.
    Chairman Baird. I am a strong advocate of making sure we 
expand opportunities for historically black colleges and other 
minority and women serving institutions, but I have a question 
about this, and help walk me through it. My understanding of 
the Hubs is that there is intended to be some degree of 
geographical centrality and coordination.
    In other words, this is not a dispersed electronic 
collaboration, but the idea is analogous to the Bell Labs 
model. The idea is to put researchers focused on a common 
focus, specific goal, together in one area, to hammer away at 
that goal, in an Apollo-like or Manhattan-like or Bell Labs-
like model. Is that accurate?
    Counsel. That is accurate, where practicable.
    Chairman Baird. The challenge I have is, then, comparable 
to Mr. Inglis? If that is the case, and my understanding is 
there is a relatively small number of Hubs to be created. I 
think Secretary Chu looked at eight proposals over some period 
of time.
    How many hubs do we envision being created?
    Counsel. The legislation is currently silent on the number 
of Hubs to be created. For right now, three are appropriated, 
and one is requested for Financial Year 2011. So, there is--
    Chairman Baird. But there is, okay, so three are 
appropriated, one is requested. There are a fairly small 
number.
    Counsel. An additional is requested for Financial Year 
2011.
    Chairman Baird. Okay. But there is, even if we set aside 
the numbers, there is also some realistic, practical 
constraints, in terms of how much funding is to be given to 
these.
    Counsel. Yes, the Administration indicated in the Financial 
Year 2010 budget that eight would be, would ultimately be 
created.
    The funding levels in the authorization of appropriation 
envisions eight, ultimately, being created. However, the number 
in the bill, the number of Hubs in the bill is not specified.
    Chairman Baird. My problem here is this. I mean, there are, 
if we accept this premise that a Hub is meant to be a 
geographically centralized location, and given a relatively 
constrained number of potential Hubs to be created, it seems to 
be that we are very particular, I don't have a map off the top 
of my head, of these particular, of the distribution of these 
particular institutions that qualify.
    Maybe someone can enlighten me. Are we not de facto saying 
that the Hubs can only go to certain places and not to others? 
Mr. Tonko--
    Mr. Gordon. If the Chairman would yield.
    I think, again, the premise we all agree with is that there 
should be an outreach effort here. I guess what I would say is 
probably the thing to do is maybe to agree to the amendment, 
and then, work with Ms. Johnson between now and the Full 
Committee, to see if there should be, you know, any kind of 
changes, in terms of numerical.
    But at least, I think we all agree that there should be 
this concept of a sensitivity to those institutions.
    Chairman Baird. Yeah, reclaiming my time. The challenge, 
and I will get to Mr. Tonko in just a moment. The challenge I 
face is, it is not, I don't think the issue is just numerical.
    I think the issue is the fundamental core concept of what 
constitutes a Hub, and what constitutes, I am lacking the word.
    Mr. Gordon. I think it is frontier.
    Chairman Baird. Consortia. So, the point being, it would be 
one thing if you say we want collaboration, because we want to 
encourage involvement, but you pick a university and say, you 
can collaborate from afar. I mean, if the best applicants for 
the job are located there, terrific, fantastic.
    But to say that, it seems to be that effective, we are 
ruling out a very, we are effectively ruling out a very large 
portion of the country.
    Mr. Tonko.
    Mr. Tonko. Mr. Chair, I believe the vision here is to model 
after those existing success stories, which then defines the 
Hubs as single focus, with multi-discipline, multi-
investigator, multi-institution. So, multi-institution, for a 
single Hub, means the incorporation of a number of those 
concepts, I think, where you could then, in the spirit of the 
Congresswoman's amendment, bring in her intention.
    They are, by design, supposed to have a central location, a 
core, grounded central location, but it is still multi-
institutional.
    Chairman Baird. Reclaiming my time. I think that is 
correct. My concern is, my understanding of the premise of the 
Hubs: Bell Labs was not--my understanding, and I can't speak 
for the Secretary, but maybe counsel can advise. If you look at 
Apollo, if you look at the Manhattan Project, now yes, there 
were various areas of the country that worked together. Mr. 
Lujan knows this better, but coincidentally, my father was at 
school at Los Alamos Boys School, and the Federal Government 
came by and said kids, you have got to leave. There is 
something special going to happen here.
    And the premise was, that he had asthma, which is why he 
was out there. So, the premise was that we are going to get all 
these really bright people together in one place, so that you 
go across a hall, work on the chalkboard, and solve the 
problem. Now, that was pre-Internet days, et cetera, but the 
idea was we are going to put everybody together, so they are 
able to hammer away at this one objective together, physically 
and proximally.
    And I understand, my understanding is that is part of what 
this Hub thing is about. And so, my concern, then, is if we 
then, we are basically saying many parts of the country can't 
actually compete, that is my concern. And I am really worried 
about this. Though I am passionate about involving minorities 
in this issue.
    My time has expired, but did counsel want to comment on 
this?
    Counsel.--to get a Hub. And then, Hubs are ideally located 
under one roof, but that does not preclude that other 
participants outside of this one centralized location can 
participate.
    Chairman Baird. Ms. Johnson.
    Ms. Johnson. Yes.
    Chairman Baird. Mr. Garamendi. Actually, I will recognize 
Mr. Garamendi, and then get back to Ms. Johnson.
    Ms. Johnson. Mr. Chairman, he described that correctly. 
What--that--this has been on much discussion, and has already 
passed the House on another bill, that has stopped in the 
Senate.
    Now, we know that these Hubs will be located around the 
country. There are concentrations of these sorts of black 
colleges in the South. There are concentrations of the 
participating Indians are in the West. And the majority of the 
concentrations of Hispanics, for the most part, are in the 
Southwest.
    And there will be consortiums around these areas. This just 
means that, to try to include them in that consortium. And it 
started out, in the original language, having lots of them, but 
we decided that if we do it by consortium, at least one 
historically black college, at least one Hispanic serving 
institution, and at least one Indian serving institution, could 
be included geographically within a Hub.
    Mr. Gordon. Would the gentlelady yield?
    Ms. Johnson. Sure.
    Mr. Gordon. I think what we have here is, the Hub concept 
is geographic, as Chairman Baird said. It is trying to get 
people there working together, but as a practical matter, there 
is no place in the United States where everybody is already 
there.
    And so, if you were going to have a Solar Hub, for example, 
it may very well go to the University of Arizona, but if you 
have a specialist at Columbia University, or another one at 
Berkeley, another one at Fisk, then, they might take 
sabbaticals and relocate there.
    Chairman Baird. Is it, if I may, is it the Chairman's 
belief that that would fit as part of the, qualifying as part 
of the member of the consortia, if faculty.
    Mr. Gordon. That would be my understanding, yes. In other 
words, you could have Fisk University participate, either at, 
they could be the Hub there, you know, there at their campus or 
in that area, or they could be a part of something going on at 
Berkeley, California.
    So, they would partner, but again, no single area would 
have a monopoly on all of the best personnel. Now, and, but, 
and what we have here, I will just go a little bit further, as 
Ms. Johnson said, this basically is the language that passed on 
an Energy and Commerce bill that had a larger number of Hubs.
    And so, we are sort of, to some extent, we are taking this 
compromise language from one bill and putting it somewhere 
else. I think it probably is appropriate, but it can also have 
more discussion, I think, between now and our final--
    Chairman Baird. The gentleman's point is well taken. I 
just, and I note that, for the record, that Ms. Johnson was 
nodding when we noted, the premise is not necessarily that the 
location of the Hub must be determined geographically by the 
location of said institution. Their participation in the 
process, and the focus of the Hub, is what matters. So, that 
there could be an inclusiveness in that, but not necessarily a 
de facto mandate that there only be certain geographical. With 
that clarification, I am much more comfortable with this, and 
appreciate the indulgence.
    Mr. Inglis. Would the gentleman yield, or whose time is it?
    Chairman Baird. I will recognize the gentleman.
    Mr. Inglis. Well, I was just, I think that if we are going 
to discuss it between now and Full Committee, the better 
approach is to not include this now. To include it now, with 
such question about it, seems unwise.
    It seems wiser to wait until the Full Committee, and work 
out the language, because at this point, we are talking about a 
specific number, on an amendment that doesn't seem like it fits 
with the overall bill.
    And so, I don't know why we would want, as a committee, 
subcommittee, to lock ourselves into a three number, and then 
need to change that at Full Committee. Why don't we just leave 
it out now, and discuss it as we move toward the Full 
Committee?
    And I would signal to you that, at least from my 
perspective, the best way to do that is to have no numerical 
indication there, because it is better to say special 
preference or special consideration be given, without 
establishing a number. Because the numbers are all moving 
around here. And it would, it seems unwise to set a specific 
number.
    Ms. Johnson. May I just comment on that?
    Mr. Inglis. Would be happy to yield.
    Ms. Johnson. Mr. Inglis, I don't mind waiting until we get 
to the Full Committee. But the intent of this language was to 
make sure that only, not to put these institutions in a lot of 
competition with each other, but to make an opportunity where 
each category can have an opportunity to participate.
    And that is really what we came down to. If you, I don't 
know if you remember, the original language had like 15 and 16, 
and but it was pulled down, as we, as the Tri-Caucus discussed 
it, and the Innovation Caucus discussed it, we put it where 
there could be an opportunity for one from each general 
location, I mean, description to participate, and not make it 
look as if they had to compete among each other. That is why 
three was put there.
    Chairman Baird. I appreciate the clarification. One of the 
things we have done today at several points is agreed to work 
on language in the interim, and not necessarily consider. We 
did this with amendments prior, I think from both sides, if I 
am not mistaken, where we have said look, we will, we may pass 
this now, but we are still going to revisit the language.
    And it sounds to me, like, that we are getting, that we are 
of a common purpose here, and we want to revisit this. And 
again, the Chairman has raised the point that there are some 
concurrency with language passed by other committees, that we 
want to be able to discuss those.
    My understanding is that this language is concurrent with 
language already in existence, the letter of this language. Is 
that right? Can I refer to counsel, that language already 
exists?
    Counsel. This is consistent with language that was in what 
is known as the Waxman-Markey bill, in the House-passed 
version.
    Chairman Baird. Okay. Well, since that is not going 
anywhere, we might want to revisit. That is not, that is hardly 
written in stone, unless it is some kind of soapstone.
    What I think, at this point, we have heard the points. My 
point really, facetiousness and silliness aside, we are not 
bound by that. It is not existing law, and it is up to question 
whether it will become that.
    But my encouragement would be that we pass, we move to the 
vote on the amendment, but with an agreement that we get 
together and discuss some of these points, and that we may want 
to do it, I would have to ask the Chairman, because he will be 
managing the full bill, that we would discuss some of the finer 
points between now and then. Is that--
    Mr. Gordon. It is Ms. Johnson's amendment, but I will 
certainly, would feel comfortable with that.
    Chairman Baird. Is the gentlelady, in other words, willing 
to put this amendment up for a vote, as is, and, but if it is 
to pass, that we would also have some further discussion, to 
clarify some of these points?
    Mr. Inglis, did you have a final comment before the roll 
call?
    Mr. Inglis. If that is where we are headed, then I want to 
offer a second degree amendment to the amendment.
    Chairman Baird. The gentleman will state his amendment. So, 
is there an amendment at the desk?
    Mr. Inglis. Not yet. Get it down to the desk.
    Chairman Baird. So, okay, let us write something down.
    Mr. Inglis. It is scratching out the first, to the first 
comma. Lines 1 and 2.
    Chairman Baird. Read the omitted line and then, we will 
hand the written copy to counsel.
    Mr. Inglis. It just takes out the words, ``For at least 
three awards to consortia under this section,'' so it would, 
and then, it would make an initial cap on ``the'' for ``The 
Secretary.'' So, it just takes out one.
    Chairman Baird. Can we, can counsel photocopy that and make 
it available to the Members, please?
    Mr. Inglis. It takes out the first ten words.
    Chairman Baird. And it is what page, again, Mr. Inglis, so 
Members can look in their folders?
    Mr. Inglis. It is page 1 of Ms. Johnson's--
    Chairman Baird. Oh, sorry, you are just amending her 
amendment, sorry.
    Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, if you, it might, having a little 
subconference here. I think that some Members on this side 
would prefer, rather than get into this ad hoc amending right 
now, that we just not go forward with this amendment, and try 
to look at it in a more holistic way, rather than, again, try 
to get down to fine language through pieces of paper back and 
forth.
    If that would be, again, as Ms. Johnson is the, would have 
to do that.
    Chairman Baird. So, we would presumably, counsel, have to 
ask Mr. Inglis to withdraw his amendment to Ms. Johnson's 
amendment, and then, she would withdraw her amendment, or if 
he, if she just withdraws her amendment, that obviates his 
withdrawal, is that correct?
    So, is that the way the gentlelady wishes to proceed? Ms. 
Johnson. Yes, so if you withdraw your amendment, then it 
obviates his need to withdraw it. So, does the gentlelady wish 
to withdraw her amendment? Then that, then, takes care of his 
amendment to your amendment, because there is nothing to amend. 
If we get much more complex, I will be lost.
    Ms. Johnson. Yeah. Well, what I would like to is adopt the 
language and be open for looking at it a second time in Full 
Committee.
    The amendment that he is offering to this amendment 
actually guts it, after lots of deliberation and working with a 
number of people outside this committee.
    So, I do have some concern about gutting it before we agree 
to look at it in Full Committee. I would rather have it adopted 
as it is, and leave it for review when we get there.
    Perhaps we can get even more background as to how this was 
arrived.
    Chairman Baird. So, the gentlelady does not wish to 
withdraw her amendment, is what I am hearing. The gentleman is 
entitled to offer his amendment if he so chooses.
    And do you have an amendment at the desk?
    Mr. Inglis. Yeah, I want to continue with the amendment.
    Chairman Baird. The clerk will report the amendment to the 
amendment.
    The Clerk. Does everyone have a copy of the amendment?
    Chairman Baird. I thought it had been distributed. Has it?
    Mr. Inglis. No.
    Chairman Baird. Oh, I am sorry. I apologize. I thought I 
saw staff passing something out. My apologies. We will wait 
until we receive that amendment. I am being instructed by 
counsel that technically, this would qualify as a substitute to 
Ms. Johnson's amendment, because you are not adding language. 
We are replacing the whole legislation with the existing text 
of Ms. Johnson's minus those stricken words.
    Ms. Biggert. Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Baird. Yes, Ms. Biggert.
    Ms. Biggert. Since this is getting more and more 
complicated, it appears to me that, how long have we spent on 
this now, about 45 minutes, it seems like, that I would 
recommend that we, you know, let this go, and come back for the 
final.
    Ms. Johnson. Why don't we vote on the substitute?
    Chairman Baird. Well, we will, Ms.--if that is dependent on 
the wishes of Mr. Inglis, who is offering the substitute, but 
we have to get the text to the Members. Unless Mr. Inglis 
wishes to withdraw that, we would have to get the text to the 
Members before we vote on the substitute. So, we are awaiting 
that, and if that should be pretty quickly available to us. 
Unless Mr. Inglis wishes to change his position.
    You have the text here. It is up to Mr. Inglis. If he wants 
to proceed, we will distribute the amendment, and call a vote 
on the amendment in the nature of a substitute.
    Mr. Gordon. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that he is not 
changing his position, just waiting to do it until a later 
time.
    Chairman Baird. That is dependent on Mr. Inglis.
    Mr. Inglis. You know, I liked the Chairman's suggestion, 
that we just wait until Full Committee on this. The gentlelady 
from Texas is not agreeable to that position. So, therefore, I 
am maintaining my position, which is it is not wise to set in 
stone a number, in this subcommittee, waiting for moving to 
full committee.
    But I would very much appreciate the Chairman's suggestion, 
that we agree to discuss this between here and Full Committee, 
in which case, I would be happy to withdraw the amendment.
    Chairman Baird. I would like the staff to distribute Mr. 
Inglis' proposal, so people know what we are talking about 
here. Distribution does not prejudge whether we will actually 
take action on it, but at least Members have it before them.
    Mr. Bartlett. Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Baird. Yes, Mr. Bartlett.
    Mr. Bartlett. I would concur with the Chairman of the Full 
Committee's concern. One way of interpreting this amendment is, 
if we are going to have, and the words ``at least three awards 
to consortia,'' and if we are going to have three Hubs, you 
could interpret this that all three Hubs are going to go to 
these minorities.
    And I am sure that is not her intent.
    Ms. Johnson. No. That is not what the amendment says.
    Mr. Bartlett. But obviously, the amendment needs more work, 
so that it wouldn't be confusing. Wouldn't you agree?
    Chairman Baird. It is not for me to agree. Did anyone wish 
to respond to Mr. Bartlett's point? Mr. Lujan.
    Mr. Lujan. Mr. Chairman, what the amendment simply does, it 
says that if it is Yale, MIT, or Pitt that gets the award, that 
they just have to have a partnership with one of these 
qualifying institutions to be able to do this wonderful work.
    It is not saying that this has to go a specific institution 
that is of one of these classifications. And that is simply 
what it says. And so, it is simply saying that these various 
minority serving institutions will be included as part of this 
discussion.
    Mr. Gordon. If the gentleman would yield. It doesn't really 
say that. I mean, it says they should be given consideration. 
It doesn't say that you are mandated to have one. So, that 
should be clear.
    It says, ``the Secretary shall give special consideration 
to applicants in which one or more of these institutions,'' and 
it goes on, so it doesn't mandate you. You do not have to have 
one of these. You know, but if you, I guess, if you did, if 
there was a point score or something of this nature, it would 
give you additional points, but it doesn't make you.
    Chairman Baird. All other things being equal, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Inglis. Except it says three, in which case, there is a 
number.
    Mr. Gordon. Well, because there is three different groups.
    Mr. Inglis. Yeah, but there is, but it establishes a 
number. It is three.
    Mr. Bartlett. It says at least three awards. So, the 
language is conflicting. It is not consistent.
    Mr. Gordon. Well, I think it is because there are, it is, 
there are three Hubs that are currently set up. So, all three.
    Mr. Inglis. Well, it is open to different interpretation.
    Chairman Baird. So, all three of the ones that are 
currently set up, but therefore--
    Mr. Gordon. Or excuse me, not set up, but rather, 
appropriated for.
    Mr. Inglis. But Mr. Lujan is correct, all three must have a 
partner, which would be a 100 percent.
    Chairman Baird. Let me ask the counsel to give us an 
opinion on this, because my reading is more closely aligned to 
Chairman Gordon's reading, that it is, that the letter of the 
law, or the letter of the proposed amendment, is not saying 
that all three must have a partner.
    My reading is that for at least three of the awards, 
consideration must be given, but that does not mandate, 
consideration does not mandate selection for an award.
    Counsel. That is counsel's interpretation as well.
    Chairman Baird. Does that clarify?
    Mr. Inglis. Well, Mr. Chairman, the thing that is really 
odd about that is, wouldn't you want to have 100 percent 
consideration? Why would we want to have three consideration, 
if that is consideration? I mean, I should think that we would 
want 100 percent consideration.
    Mr. Lujan. Mr. Chairman, does that mean that we should say 
for all appropriated?
    Mr. Inglis. Actually, that is what my amendment does, is it 
takes out the three, in which case 100 percent have 
consideration. Yes, I would be happy to add the words, 
something like in all cases, the Secretary should give 
consideration. That would be a good idea.
    Chairman Baird. Let me ask the opinion of counsel. Would 
the addition of the 100 percent, or is the absence of the three 
not implicit? Does that not contain within the assumption of 
100 percent?
    So, in other words, rather than amending his amendment, he 
has already accomplished, I think.
    Counsel. It is our interpretation, by striking the language 
Mr. Inglis has asked to strike, the Secretary shall give 
special consideration to all applications.
    Chairman Baird. And again--
    Counsel. In which one or more of the institutions, under 
subsection (B)(1)(a), are 1890 Land Grant institutions, et 
cetera.
    Chairman Baird. And then, again, for purposes of 
clarification again, to echo Chairman Gordon's point. Special 
consideration does not mandate that the selection include that 
the ultimate selection includes said institutions, merely that 
in the process of reaching that determination, they get 
consideration, those which reach out.
    So, it is advantageous for an applicant to seek such 
consideration, but it is not prescriptive about whether you 
will or will not get it.
    Counsel. It would be speculative for counsel to say whether 
it is advantageous or not.
    Chairman Baird. Right. Okay. Fair enough. But our intent 
here, the letter of the language, with Mr. Inglis' 
modification, there is for clarification to my colleagues, and 
according to counsel here, is not saying that the ultimate 
selection must have one of the designated institutions, merely 
that special consideration must be given to such institutions 
in the application process.
    Counsel. That is correct.
    Chairman Baird. Correct. Is that, Mr. Garamendi?
    Mr. Garamendi. I thank you for the clarification. We are 
getting closer and closer, and perhaps, we are getting a little 
further away from a solution here.
    Part of the problem is that the specific language in the 
rest of the bill speaks to the physical location, which was the 
issue that the chairman brought up at the outset.
    I think we need to be really cautious here about the way in 
which all of this comes together. I think it is very clear 
where the Committee wants to go, which really reflects what Mr. 
Lujan said, is that, as part of a consortium, these 
institutions should be given Let me restate that. In an 
application for a Hub, a consortium that includes these 
institutions should be given special consideration.
    The problem lies in the other sections of the bill, which 
speak to a physical location. And in that regard, when you 
combine these two things, we get a complexity. And I think we 
need to do a little bit more wordsmithing here, so that we 
don't direct the physical location to a place where it may not 
be appropriate, not because of the quality of an institution, 
but rather, because of what the institution may have available 
in resources for that particular Hub.
    A little more wordsmithing, and we will get there. Whether 
we do it as a full committee or not is a question that has been 
raised by several, and I don't have an answer to that, but I 
don't think we are home yet.
    Chairman Baird. Other comment, Mr. Lujan.
    Mr. Lujan. Mr. Chairman, along the lines of Mr. Inglis' 
amendment, I would ask unanimous consent to carry out what I 
believe the intent of this is, to add the word ``all'' on line 
3, after the word ``to,'' so that it would read ``the Secretary 
shall give special consideration to all applications in which 
one or more of the institutions under subsection,'' as the 
language goes on.
    Chairman Baird. I am sorry, Mr. Lujan. I, first of all, I 
think we would probably need, and I will ask counsel, we would 
probably need that in writing, rather than you see, I don't 
know, but I didn't see, I, as you read it, I didn't hear the 
change. Can you say it again? But I think we--
    Mr. Lujan. On line 3, after the word ``to.''
    Chairman Baird. Oh, I see. I see. I got it.
    Mr. Lujan. Add the word ``all'' before applications. 
Because it is my understanding that this should be given 
consideration for all applications, and I think that clarifies 
that we want to give this for all applications.
    Chairman Baird. No. I will ask counsel to opine about that.
    Counsel. Our interpretation is that would change the 
meaning of this introduction, which would, to say instead of 
``all awards,'' to say ``all applicants,'' would mean something 
different, so--
    Mr. Lujan. Mr. Chairman, if I could seek clarification. It 
is not ``applicant.'' It is ``applications.''
    Counsel. I mean ``applications,'' so ``all applications.''
    Mr. Lujan. So, the applications. So, how is that different 
than what we are doing here by simply saying the Secretary 
shall give special consideration to applications? Isn't 
applications, on all applications? Is there a difference 
between when you describe applications, that it only means a 
portion of the applications, instead of all the applications?
    Chairman Baird. If the Chair can offer an opinion here at 
this point.
    Mr. Gordon. I think if the Chair would yield to Ms. 
Johnson.
    Chairman Baird. Yes, Ms. Johnson.
    Ms. Johnson. Yes, Mr. Chairman. What I don't want to do is 
put a lot of language in here that makes it more vulnerable for 
defeat, which I think that is the way we are probably headed.
    In view of that, I would like to ask that it be postponed, 
and ask Mr. Inglis if he would work with us between now and 
Full Committee, on some language that he, perhaps he can agree 
with. I don't expect him to agree with too much.
    Mr. Inglis. I think, I accept that suggestion. I think we 
can work together on that. I think it is the wisdom of the 
Chairman down there that suggested that about 20 minutes ago.
    Ms. Johnson. I know, but you kept chugging it.
    Mr. Inglis. No, actually, I tried to accept the Chairman's 
suggestion.
    Chairman Baird. I think we have reached a good point, at 
which we can--
    Ms. Johnson. Your language is a giant killer.
    Chairman Baird. If the gentlelady wishes to withdraw her 
amendment, pending further discussion, and with the 
gentlelady's withdrawal, the chair would--
    Mr. Gordon. Or delay might be a better term.
    Chairman Baird. Or if she will delay her amendment until--
    Mr. Gordon. Withdraw it now until later.
    Ms. Johnson. Postpone the consideration.
    Mr. Gordon. Until the Full Committee.
    Chairman Baird. Okay. That is fine. Delay consideration 
until Full Committee, but with an agreement, collegial 
agreement to work on this, with the advice of counsel. I think 
that is the point we have reached. We are not going to be able 
to solve this right now, and with words. The general sense is, 
I think there is strong agreement. We want to promote active 
involvement by the institutions designated in this amendment. I 
think that is there. I share with Mr. Garamendi the issue of 
the complexity of the physical location. So, I will ask of my 
colleagues to work together on this between now and final 
consideration by the Full Committee, and hope that we can reach 
some kind of concurrence on this.
    Are there any other amendments that anyone wishes to offer?
    If no, then the vote is on the committee print, as amended. 
All those in favor will say aye. Aye. All those opposed, no.
    In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it. I recognize 
myself. Mr. Inglis.
    Mr. Inglis. Mr. Chairman, if I may. And two other questions 
of counsel, if that is okay.
    Chairman Baird. Well, I don't know. It probably is, just as 
a courtesy I think that train may have left the station, but 
just let us get the questions on the record, so that we can 
have that for consideration in the further deliberations.
    Mr. Inglis. Okay. So, I thank the Chairman for his 
indulgence. One is, would the Hub model be available to 
challenges associated with transportation technology or fossil 
fuel efficiency?
    Counsel. It is counsel's interpretation that yes, it would 
be.
    Mr. Inglis. Great, and several of the Hub priorities seem 
to call on work ongoing at the Department of Energy. For 
example, the Administration is proposing to fund batteries, an 
Energy Storage Hub in the Financial Year 2011 budget. Similar 
work is currently ongoing at ARPA-E, Energy Frontier Research 
Centers, and Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. It doesn't 
sound like, it doesn't sound responsible to fund the same work 
in three different places, let alone four.
    Are there measures in this bill to prevent duplication of 
efforts at DOE?
    Counsel. As the Hubs are defined, we see that there is no 
duplication. There are intersections, but they do not run 
parallel to programs that are being done by DOE.
    Mr. Inglis. So, the--is, I guess our question is, is there 
anything in the bill that prevents that sort of duplication, 
or--
    Counsel. I will refer to page 34, subsection (3), 
Coordination. ``The Secretary shall ensure the coordination of 
and avoid unnecessary duplication of the activities of Hubs, 
with those of other Department of Energy research entities.''
    Mr. Inglis. So, there is an intent there to avoid that 
duplication that we were just identifying here.
    Counsel. There is.
    Mr. Inglis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Chairman Baird. Thank you, Mr. Inglis.
    With that, I move that the Subcommittee favorably report 
the Committee print, as amended, to the Full Committee.
    Furthermore, I move that staff be instructed to prepare the 
Subcommittee report, and make necessary technical and 
conforming changes to the print, in accordance with the 
recommendations of the Subcommittee.
    The question is on the motion to report the print 
favorably. Those in favor of the motion will signify by saying 
aye. Aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. The print is favorably 
reported.
    Without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon 
the table.
    Members will have two subsequent calendar days in which to 
submit supplemental Minority or additional views on the 
measure.
    I want to thank the Members, and particularly, also, the 
staff for their diligent work on this, and look forward to 
final markup.
    This concludes our subcommittee markup.
    [Whereupon, at 1:00 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

                               Appendix:

                              ----------                              


     Committee Print, Section-By-Section Analysis, Amendment Roster






<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>

                     Section-By-Section Analysis of
            DOE Office of Science Authorization Act of 2010

Title I-Office of Science

Sec. 101: Short Title

    Gives title of the bill as the ``DOE Office of Science 
Authorization Act of 2010''

Sec. 102: Definitions

    Provides definitions for ``DEPARTMENT'', ``DIRECTOR'', ``OFFICE OF 
SCIENCE'', and ``SECRETARY''

Sec. 103: Office of Science Activities

    Directs the Secretary of Energy to carry out research, development, 
demonstration, and commercial application activities in science 
supporting the missions of the Department, including programs on basic 
energy sciences, biological and environmental research, advanced 
scientific computing research, fusion energy sciences, high energy 
physics, and nuclear physics.
    Instructs the Department's Under Secretary for Science to ensure 
the coordination with the other activities of the Department, and 
support joint activities among the Department's programs.

Sec. 104: Basic Energy Sciences Program

    Directs the Director of the Office of Science to carry out a 
program in basic energy sciences, including materials sciences and 
engineering, chemical sciences, biosciences, and geosciences, for the 
purpose of providing the scientific foundations for new energy 
technologies.
    As part of this program, the Director is instructed to support:

         1) construction and operation of the program's major user 
        facilities,

         2) competitively awarded energy frontier research centers, and

         3) relevant accelerator research and development activities, 
        in coordination with the Office of Science's High Energy 
        Physics and Nuclear Physics programs.

Sec. 105: Biological and Environmental Research Program

    Authorizes a program of research, development, demonstration, and 
commercial application in the areas of biological systems science and 
climate and environmental science.
    The biological systems science research includes activities to:

         1) establish a virtual systems biology information framework,

         2) support research on computational biology,

         3) continue the research of the bioenergy research centers, 
        and expand them to include biobased products, and

         4) direct the program to develop a synthetic biology plan.

    The climate and environment science research includes activities 
to:

         1) support the research and coordination of the ecosystem 
        observation AmeriFlux Network,

         2) develop a next-generation ecosystem-climate change 
        experiment,

         3) continue research in regional and global climate modeling, 
        and

         4) support integrated assessment research.

Sec. 106. Advanced Scientific Computing Research Program

    Directs the Director to carry out a research, development, 
demonstration, and commercial application program to advance 
computational and networking capabilities to analyze, model, simulate, 
and predict complex phenomena relevant to the development of new energy 
technologies and the competitiveness of the United States.
    Instructs the Secretary to produce a plan to integrate and leverage 
the expertise and capabilities of the program, as well as other 
relevant computational programs and resources supported by the Federal 
Government, to advance the missions of the Department's applied energy 
and energy efficiency programs.
    Instructs the Secretary to, at least 18 months prior to the 
initiation of construction or installation of any exascale-class 
computing facility, produce a plan detailing the proposed facility's 
cost projections and capabilities to significantly accelerate the 
development of new energy technologies.
    Authorizes research and development activities in applied 
mathematics, high-end computing software development, and next-
generation computing architectures and platforms to support the 
missions of the Department.

Sec. 107. Fusion Energy Research Program

    Directs the Director to carry out a fusion energy sciences research 
and development program on the scientific and engineering challenges to 
building a cost-competitive fusion power plant and a fusion power 
industry in the United States.
    As part of this program, the Director is instructed to:

         1) coordinate and carry out the responsibilities of the United 
        States with respect to the ITER international fusion project,

         2) produce a 10-year prioritization plan,

         3) support fusion materials research and development 
        activities in coordination with the Assistant Secretary for 
        Nuclear Energy,

         4) carry out a computational project to advance the capability 
        of fusion researchers to accurately simulate an entire fusion 
        energy system, in collaboration with the Advanced Scientific 
        Computing Research program, and

         In addition, the Secretary is instructed to establish a 
        research and development program in inertial fusion for energy 
        applications.

Sec. 108. High Energy Physics Program

    Directs the Director to carry out a research program on the 
elementary constituents of matter and energy and the nature of space 
and time.
    As part of this program, the Director is instructed to support 
research in the nature of the neutrino, dark energy, and dark matter.
    The Director is also instructed to carry out research and 
development in advanced accelerator concepts and technologies to reduce 
the necessary scope and cost for the next generation of particle 
accelerators.

Sec. 109. Nuclear Physics Program

    Directs the Director to carry out a research program, and support 
relevant facilities, to discover and understand various forms of 
nuclear matter.
    Director is also instructed to carry out a program for the 
production of isotopes, including the development of techniques to 
produce isotopes, for research applications.

Sec. 110. Science Laboratories Infrastructure Program

    Directs the Director to carry out a program to improve the safety, 
efficiency, and mission readiness of infrastructure at Office of 
Science laboratories.
    Sets the minor construction threshold at Office of Science 
laboratories at $10 million, to be adjusted by the Secretary in 
accordance with the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index, or 
an appropriate alternative index as determined by the Secretary, once 
every 5 years after the date of enactment of this Act.

Sec. 111. Authorization Of Appropriations

    Authorizes to be appropriated to the Secretary of Energy for the 
activities of the Office of Science:

         (1) $6,221,000,000 for fiscal year 2011

         (2) $6,656,000,000 for fiscal year 2012

         (3) $7,122,000,000 for fiscal year 2013

         (4) $7,621,000,000 for fiscal year 2014

         (5) $8,154,000,000 for fiscal year 2015.

Title II-Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy

Sec. 201. Short Title

    ARPA-E Reauthorization Act of 2010

Sec. 202. ARPA-E Amendments

    Amends section 5012 of the America COMPETES Act of 2007 through the 
following:

    (1) in GOALS
    Adds provisions to clarify that ARPA-E will achieve its goals 
through both fundamental ``and applied'' science, and through 
``promoting the commercial application of advanced energy 
technologies''.
    (2) in GOALS
    Emphasizes that the R&D on manufacturing processes and technologies 
should be for the domestic manufacturing of novel energy technologies.
    (3) Re-designates subsections (f) as (g), and reorders all 
subsections thereafter
    (4) Inserts new subsection ``(f) AWARDS'' to clarify that the 
Director of ARPA-E has the authority to initiate and execute the full 
range of award instruments of the Department, including grants, 
contracts, cooperative agreements, cash prizes and other transactions. 
``Other Transactions Authority'' is a special flexible contracting 
authority granted to the Department in Section 1007 of the Energy 
Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005.
    (5) in PERSONNEL
    Inserts new paragraph (1) requiring the Director to maintain a 
staff of qualified and experienced legal counsel, contracting 
personnel, and program directors to serve solely within ARPA-E, thus 
further allowing ARPA-E to remain separate and distinct from the other 
programs within the Department.
    Makes changes to clarify that program managers (program directors) 
can direct more than one program, and that program managers (program 
directors) are not required to seek the advice of advisory committees 
or scientific organizations in making award selections.
    Adds to the list of responsibilities of the program manager 
(program director) identifying cost-sharing opportunities for projects, 
including through possible exercising of waiver authority by the 
Secretary under Section 988 of EPAct 2005; and identifying ways to 
transfer successful energy technology development projects to the 
marketplace.
    Clarifies that the term of a program manager (program director) may 
be ``up to'' 3 years.
    Strikes requirement that ARPA-E have at least 70 and not less than 
120 personnel.
    Replaces term ``program manager'' with ``program director'' to 
align with current practices of ARPA-E.
    Authorizes the Director to hire exceptional scientific, legal, 
business, and technical personnel to serve as Fellows.

    (6) in REPORTS and ROADMAPS
    Shifts deadlines for the Director to provide the Strategic Vision 
Roadmap from 2008 and 2011, to 2010 and 2013, respectively.
    (7) in FEDERAL DEMONSTRATION OF TECHNOLOGIES
    Strengthens existing language to require Director to actively seek 
opportunities to demonstrate ARPA-E technologies through procurement by 
DOE and other Federal agencies.
    (8) Inserts new subsection ``(k) EVENTS'' authorizing the Director 
to convene events for the purposes of allowing ARPA-E project awardees 
and finalists to demonstrate technologies to a range of stakeholders, 
and for other purposes as determined by the Director.
    (9) in ARPA-E EVALUATION
    Changes from ``4 years'' to ``6 years'' the time after 
establishment at which the National Academies will evaluate the 
performance of ARPA-E.
    (10) in ARPA-E EVALUATION
    Adds a requirement that the lessons learned in the National 
Academies evaluation of ARPA-E shall consider how such lessons may 
apply to other programs within DOE.
    (11) in FUNDING
    Extends Authorization of Appropriations for Fiscal Years 2011 
through 2015:

         (A) $300,000,000 for fiscal year 2011

         (B) $500,000,000 for fiscal year 2012

         (C) $700,000,000 for fiscal year 2013

         (D) $900,000,000 for fiscal year 2014

         (E) $1,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2015

    And such sums as are necessary for each of fiscal years 2016 
through 2020.
    Strikes Limitation which made fiscal year 2008 funding for ARPA-E 
contingent upon the Office of Science receiving an increase from 2007.

Title III-Energy Innovation Hubs

Sec. 301. Short Title

    Energy Innovation Hubs Authorization Act of 2010

Sec. 302. Energy Innovation Hubs

    (a) ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM
    Directs the Secretary to carry out a program to create Energy 
Innovation Hubs that will conduct and support research, development, 
demonstration and commercial application of advanced energy 
technologies. Where practicable these activities should occur in a 
central location. Each Hub created shall be focused on a particular 
unique advanced energy technology. The Secretary will ensure that the 
program is coordinated with other DOE research entities so as to avoid 
duplication and shall convene representatives from the Hubs, DOE, and 
any other relevant entities the Secretary find appropriate. The 
Secretary shall also administer each Hub through a DOE program with 
relevant jurisdiction based on a Hub's technology focus.
    (b) CONSORTIA
    Outlines the requirements that must be met by an applicant 
consortium in order to be eligible to form a Hub. A consortium must be 
made up of at least two qualifying entities who have created a binding 
agreement documenting the partnership agreement, measures to ensure 
cost-effective implementation, a proposed budget, conflict of interest 
procedures, an accounting structure, and an external advisory 
committee. The application made by the consortium to the Secretary will 
be made by one of the consortium's members as a prime applicant.
    (c) SELECTION AND SCHEDULE
    Establishes the process by which the Secretary shall review all 
consortium applications received. The Secretary shall review all Hub 
applications received, and consortia grants will be approved through a 
competitive process. Any grant made to a Hub shall be for a period no 
longer than 5 years and may be renewed through a competitive process.
    (d) HUB OPERATIONS
    Details how a Hub, once provided a grant by the Secretary, shall 
conduct multidisciplinary, collaborative research, development, 
demonstration, and commercial application of advanced energy 
technologies. A Hub shall encourage collaboration and communication 
and, whenever practicable, conduct its activities at one centralized 
location. In order to provide greater transparency, the Hub shall 
develop and publish on DOE's website all proposed plans and programs. 
In additional to a general duty to monitor project implementation and 
coordination, the Hub shall submit an annual report to the Secretary 
that summarizes all activities and projects, expenditures, and external 
advisory committee members.
    The external advisory committee each Hub is required to establish 
under this section will act as an advisor to the Hub. The membership of 
each committee shall advise the Hub decision makers on Hub programs and 
planned activities, but shall not have decision making authority. The 
advisory committee membership should have sufficient expertise to 
provide guidance on scientific, technical, financial, and research 
management matters.
    This section also requires each Hub to establish procedures to 
address conflicts of interest amongst any employees or consortia 
designees with decision making authority. These procedures should be 
consistent with those already established by DOE and should disclose 
any material conflicts of interest. In the event the Secretary 
discovers a failure to disclose any conflict of interest he may 
disqualify an application or revoke any funds granted to the Hub.
    (e) PROHIBITION ON CONSTRUCTION
    Prohibits any funds granted by the Secretary to a Hub to be used 
for construction of a new building or facility for Hub activities. 
Furthermore, construction of new buildings or facilities shall not be 
considered as part of the non-Federal share of a Hub cost-sharing 
agreement.
    (f) OVERSIGHT BOARD
    Requires the Secretary to establish within the Department an 
Oversight Board to monitor the Hubs and their activities.
    (g) DEFINITIONS
    Provides the definitions for terms used within the bill, including: 
Advanced Energy Technology, Hub, Institution of Higher Education, 
Qualifying Entity, and Secretary.
    (h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS
    Provides authorizations for each of the fiscal years 2011 through 
2015 as follows:

         (1) $110,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;

         (2) $135,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;

         (3) $195,000,000 for fiscal year 2013;

         (4) $210,000,000 for fiscal year 2014; and

         (5) $210,000,000 for fiscal year 2015.
        <GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
        
                      Section-By-Section Analysis
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>



 PROCEEDINGS OF THE MARKUP BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND SCIENCE 
     EDUCATION ON COMMITTEE PRINT, THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 
                       AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2010

                              ----------                              


                       WEDNESDAY, APRIL 14, 2010

                  House of Representatives,
    Subcommittee on Research and Science Education,
                       Committee on Science and Technology,
                                                    Washington, DC.

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:09 a.m., in 
Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Daniel 
Lipinski [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
    Chairman Lipinski. The Subcommittee will come to order.
    Pursuant to notice, the Subcommittee on Research and 
Science Education meets to consider the following measure: 
Committee Print of the National Science Foundation 
Authorization Act of 2010. I recognize myself for an opening 
statement.
    This morning the Research and Science Education 
Subcommittee will consider the Committee Print of the National 
Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2010. Today's 
legislation will become an essential component of the 
reauthorization of the America COMPETES Act, which will be 
considered by the Full Committee later this month.
    The Subcommittee has held a series of hearings on topics 
ranging from the state of STEM education at all levels, to the 
need to promote high-risk, high-reward research, to ensuring a 
sustainable research infrastructure. In addition to our 
Subcommittee hearings, I have also held a number of listening 
sessions across the country to gain insights from those on the 
frontline of research facilitated by the NSF. The result of the 
listening sessions and the Subcommittee hearings is a bill that 
will accelerate the growth of scientific knowledge, promote 
knowledge transfer and innovation, build a 21st century STEM 
workforce, and spur economic development.
    The NSF was established 60 years ago, growing out of 
wartime research efforts and Vannevar Bush's conviction that 
``new products, new industries, and more jobs require 
continuous additions to knowledge of the laws of nature, and 
the application of that knowledge to practical purposes.'' And 
this has worked. Since World War II, 50 percent of U.S. GDP 
growth has come from the development and adoption of new 
technologies, along with countless improvements in medicine and 
national security.
    As a former assistant professor at a research university, I 
have a special appreciation for the NSF. In graduate school I 
received an NSF Dissertation Improvement Grant. Throughout my 
time in academe, I became very familiar with the critical role 
that the Foundation plays. When I was elected to Congress, I 
immediately requested a seat on this committee, partly because 
of the NSF. When I had the opportunity to chair this 
subcommittee at the beginning of this Congress, I jumped at the 
chance because I knew the NSF reauthorization was on the 
agenda.
    While many agencies fund R&D, the NSF is unique in that 
supporting fundamental research and education in STEM 
disciplines is its only mission. Today's legislation authorizes 
$47.5 billion for NSF over the next five years, keeping the 
agency on a doubling path, as recommended in the National 
Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and set in 
motion in the 2007 America COMPETES Act. While the one-time 
investment NSF received through the Recovery Act helped keep 
the scientific enterprise thriving and the brightest young 
people in the STEM pipeline, sustained growth at NSF is 
necessary to maintain gains and to ensure U.S. competitiveness.
    NSF's mission extends beyond promoting the best science, 
and the agency reviews grants not only on the basis of 
intellectual merit, but also on the broader impact of the 
activities proposed. Over 10 years ago, the NSF began to 
require that researchers include activities such as education 
and public outreach to broaden the impact of their research. 
Unfortunately, this requirement has had uneven success. This 
legislation addresses this issue by requiring NSF to 
standardize its policies for broader impacts, requiring that 
proposed activities be based on proven strategies, and 
encouraging institutions of higher education and other 
education and research organizations to assist their 
researchers in meeting the broader impacts criterion.
    The core of the NSF is innovation, and my legislation 
promotes it in a number of ways. First, it directs the NSF to 
spend at least five percent of its research budget on high-
risk, high-reward proposals that have the potential to 
transform our understanding of science and engineering and 
create new frontiers. This is consistent with what we learned 
in our hearing on this subject last year, with recommendations 
in the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm 
report, and with the 2008 American Academy of Arts and Sciences 
ARISE report.
    Next, this bill will advance manufacturing in the United 
States through investments in fundamental research in 
manufacturing technologies, materials and processes. Finally, 
it will help build stronger university-industry partnerships 
and ensure that researchers at institutions of all sizes and 
types understand how to engage successfully in knowledge 
transfer and innovation.
    But an innovation economy needs both ideas and a talented 
STEM workforce. This legislation promotes the development of 
all of the STEM talent our Nation has to offer by increasing 
the collaboration and coordination of NSF-funded education 
projects and by supporting early career researchers through 
postdoctoral fellowships. The bill also supports the equipment 
and infrastructure these researchers need to succeed, an issue 
raised continually by researchers and their academic 
institutions. The legislation addresses concerns about how the 
NSF supports mid-scale research instrumentation, and encourages 
the NSF to make sure that its investment in infrastructure, 
including cyberinfrastructure, instrumentation and 
interdisciplinary centers, grows along with the overall budget.
    Having worked on this bill for many months, I believe we 
have produced legislation that we can all be proud of and that 
will help produce a significant boost that will be felt not 
only in American research labs and American classrooms, but 
also in American homes as innovation and education produce 
jobs.
    I want to thank my colleagues, including Mr. Mitchell, who 
have worked on and written pieces of this legislation, as well 
as both the Democratic and Republican Committee staffers who 
have spent many hours working together to improve and refine 
the bill. Finally, I want to thank Members for their 
participation this morning and I look forward to a productive 
hearing.
    [The prepared statement of Chairman Lipinski follows:]
             Prepared Statement of Chairman Daniel Lipinski
    This morning the Research and Science Education Subcommittee will 
consider the Committee Print of the National Science Foundation 
Authorization Act of 2010. Today's legislation will become an essential 
component of the reauthorization of the America COMPETES Act, which 
will be considered by the full Committee later this month.
    The Subcommittee has held a series of hearings on topics ranging 
from the state of STEM education at all levels to the need to promote 
high-risk/high-reward research, to ensuring a sustainable research 
infrastructure. In addition to our Subcommittee hearings, I've also 
held a number of listening sessions across the country to gain insights 
from those on the frontline of research facilitated by the NSF. The 
result of the listening sessions and the Subcommittee hearings is a 
bill that will accelerate the growth of scientific knowledge, promote 
knowledge transfer and innovation, build a 21St century STEM workforce, 
and spur economic development. The NSF was established 60 years ago, 
growing out of wartime research efforts and Vannevar Bush's conviction 
that ``New products, new industries, and more jobs require continuous 
additions to knowledge of the laws of nature, and the application of 
that knowledge to practical purposes.'' And it has worked. Since World 
War II, 50% of U.S. GDP growth has come from the development and 
adoption of new technologies, along with countless improvements in 
medicine and national security.
    As a former assistant professor at a research university, I have a 
special appreciation for the NSF. In graduate school I received an NSF 
Dissertation Improvement Grant. Throughout my time in academia, I 
became very familiar with the critical role that the Foundation plays. 
When I was elected to Congress, I immediately requested a seat on this 
committee, partly because of the NSF. When I had the opportunity to 
chair this subcommittee at the beginning of this Congress I jumped at 
the chance because I knew the NSF reauthorization was on the agenda.
    While many agencies fund R&D, the NSF is unique in that supporting 
fundamental research and education in all STEM disciplines is its only 
mission. Today's legislation authorizes $47.5 billion for NSF over the 
next 5 years, keeping the agency on a doubling path, as recommended in 
the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and set 
in motion in the 2007 America COMPETES Act. While the one-time 
investment NSF received through the Recovery Act helped keep the 
scientific enterprise thriving and the brightest young people in the 
STEM pipeline, sustained growth at NSF is necessary to maintain gains 
and to ensure U.S. competitiveness.
    NSF's mission extends beyond promoting the best science, and the 
agency reviews grants not only on the basis of intellectual merit, but 
also on the broader impact of the activities proposed. Over 10 years 
ago, the NSF began to require that researchers include activities--such 
as education and public outreach--to broaden the impact of their 
research; unfortunately, this requirement has had uneven success. This 
legislation addresses this issue by requiring NSF to standardize its 
policies for broader impacts, requiring that proposed activities be 
based on proven strategies, and encouraging institutions of higher 
education and other education and research organizations to assist 
their researchers in meeting the broader impacts criterion.
    The core of the NSF is innovation, and my legislation promotes it 
in a number of ways. First, it directs the NSF to spend at least 5 
percent of its research budget on high-risk, high-reward proposals that 
have the potential to transform our understanding of science and 
engineering and create new frontiers. This is consistent with what we 
learned in our hearing on this subject last year, with recommendations 
in the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report, and 
with the 2008 American Academy of. Arts and Sciences ARISE report.
    Next, it will advance manufacturing in the U.S. through investments 
in fundamental research in manufacturing technologies, materials, and 
processes. Finally, it will help build stronger university-industry 
partnerships and ensure that researchers at institutions of all sizes 
and types understand how to engage successfully in knowledge transfer 
and innovation.
    But an innovation economy needs both ideas and a talented STEM 
workforce. This legislation promotes the development of all of the STEM 
talent our Nation has to offer by increasing the collaboration and 
coordination of NSF-funded education projects and by supporting early 
career researchers through postdoctoral fellowships. The bill also 
supports the equipment and infrastructure these researchers need to 
succeed, an issue raised continually by researchers and their academic 
institutions. The legislation addresses concerns about how the NSF 
supports mid-scale research instrumentation, and encourages the NSF to 
make sure that its investment in infrastructure--including 
cyberinfrastructure, instrumentation, and interdisciplinary centers--
grows along with the overall budget.
    Having worked on this bill for many months, I believe that we have 
produced legislation that we can be proud of and that will help produce 
a significant boost that will be felt not only in American research 
labs and American classrooms, but also in American homes as innovation 
and education produce jobs.
    I want to thank thy colleagues, including Mr. Mitchell, who have 
worked on and written pieces of this legislation, as well as both, the 
Democratic and Republican committee staffers who have spent many hours 
working together to improve and refine the bill. Finally, I want to 
thank Members for their participation this morning and I look forward 
to a productive markup.

    Chairman Lipinski. With that, I will turn it over to my 
colleague from Michigan, Dr. Ehlers, for his opening statement.
    Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I second your 
comments about the way in which our staff and your staff has 
worked together on this bill. It is an extremely important 
bill, and they have worked well together and the end result 
will be improved as a result.
    I have been pleased to participate in the Research and 
Science Education Subcommittee's markup and the hearings on the 
reauthorization of the National Science Foundation. This 
Committee Print will be an important piece of the 
reauthorization of the America COMPETES, and I have done 
something which is rarely done in these committees, although 
probably much more often occurs in Science Committee than any 
other committee, but I have read every word of the bill, and 
that indicates the importance of the issue and the attention 
that it needs.
    It is challenging to find large areas at the Foundation in 
need of great improvement. This is not because the agency is 
not operating well. This is an agency known for its responsible 
budgeting and respected for its merit review and evaluation 
processes. But overall I believe the bill we are considering 
today will further strengthen the National Science Foundation 
and also will improve our Nation's ability to compete globally, 
an issue that is receiving considerable attention.
    However, I have a few reservations about some of the 
provisions we are considering today. Many of my colleagues are 
concerned that the authorized levels of funding for the 
National Science Foundation may be excessively high in light of 
our current economic situation, as well as the recent infusion 
of funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. In 
particular, some of my colleagues believe that infusion of 
funds eliminates the need for an increase at this point. You 
and I both know that is not correct.
    I think that we can all agree that the NSF will function 
most effectively if we continue it on a strong doubling path 
that is also sustainable and that path was set forth in the 
America COMPETES Act and in subsequent actions, both in the 
Administration and in the Congress. I am hopeful that all of us 
can work together to find common ground on this issue and 
others that may raise questions about the appropriate roles and 
responsibilities of the NSF.
    As I said before, I want to recognize and thank the 
majority staff for working closely with the minority staff on 
many of the provisions included in the Committee Print, as well 
as incorporating a variety of expertise from the NSF 
stakeholder community. I look forward to our continued 
collaborations as we improve and refine the Committee Print 
before us today, and I thank you for the good atmosphere that 
you have maintained in this subcommittee, Mr. Chairman, and the 
way we have worked together for the good of the institution as 
well as the good of the research effort in America.
    With that, I yield back.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Ehlers follows:]
         Prepared Statement of Representative Vernon J. Ehlers
    I am pleased to participate in the Research and Science Education 
Subcommittee's markup of the reauthorization of the National Science 
Foundation (NSF). This Committee Print will be an important piece of 
the reauthorization of the America COMPETES Act.
    It is challenging to find large areas at the Foundation in need of 
great improvement. This is an agency known for its responsible 
budgeting and respected for its merit-review and evaluation processes. 
Overall, I believe the bill we are considering today further 
strengthens the National Science Foundation and improves our nation's 
ability to compete globally.
    However, I have a few reservations about some of the provisions we 
are considering today. Many of my colleagues are concerned that the 
authorized levels of funding for the NSF may be excessively high in 
light of our current economic situation, as well as the recent infusion 
of funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. I think that 
we can all agree that the NSF will function most effectively if we 
continue it on a strong doubling path that is also sustainable. I am 
hopeful that we can work together to find common ground on this issue 
and others that may raise questions about the appropriate roles and 
responsibilities of the NSF.
    I want to recognize and thank the majority staff for working 
closely with the minority staff on many of the provisions included in 
the Committee Print, as well as incorporating a variety of expertise 
from the NSF stakeholder community. I look forward to continued 
collaborations as we improve and refine the Committee Print before us 
today.

    Chairman Lipinski. Thank you, Dr. Ehlers, and thank you for 
all your collaboration on making things move smoothly here, run 
smoothly. I think it is the best way for things to run and 
certainly not just for this subcommittee but for the entire 
Congress to work out best for our country and in science in 
general, which is what we're here for.
    Does anyone else wish to be recognized?
    So at this point I ask unanimous consent that the print is 
considered as read and open to amendment at any point and that 
the members proceed with amendments in the order of the roster. 
Without objection, so ordered.
    Chairman Lipinski. The first amendment on the roster is a 
Manager's Amendment offered by the Chair. The clerk will report 
the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 006, amendment to the Committee 
Print offered by Mr. Lipinski of Illinois.
    Chairman Lipinski. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 
the reading. Without objection, so ordered. I recognize myself 
for five minutes to explain the amendment.
    This Manager's Amendment makes a number of technical and 
clarifying changes to the legislation in addition to codifying 
the important statistical work of the Foundation and adding 
three new sections that focus on the critical issues of 
promoting innovation and improving STEM education.
    The first amendment adds a new section that codifies the 
function of the NSF Division of Science Resources Statistics as 
a central federal clearinghouse for objective data on a 
scientific and engineering enterprise and the state of U.S. 
STEM education. SRS is responsible for the biennial Science and 
Engineering Indicators report that Congress relies so heavily 
on for an understanding of the state of U.S. competitiveness in 
science and technology. This section in reality is nothing more 
than a name change for SRS, but such a name change confers on 
them a status that truly reflects the critical work they do.
    The next main section, Partnerships for Innovation, was 
introduced earlier as H.R. 4998 by Mr. Hill. This section 
requires the Director of NSF to carry out a program to support 
partnerships between institutions of higher education and 
private-sector entities in order to promote innovation and 
increase the economic and social impact of their research. The 
ultimate goal is for these kinds of partnerships between 
diverse institutions and local industry to help spur regional 
economic growth and ensure a well-prepared STEM workforce for 
local jobs.
    Finally, the amendment introduces to the legislation two 
sections focused specifically on institutional reform and 
undergraduate and graduate STEM education. I want to thank Ms. 
Kosmas for introducing H.R. 4955, Transforming Undergraduate 
STEM Education, which has been incorporated as one of these 
sections. It authorizes a program of grants to colleges and 
universities to reform undergraduate STEM education, both to 
increase the number of STEM graduates and to improve STEM 
education for all students. This provision will go a long way 
to spurring the kind of institutional transformation that will 
result in better preparation of our graduates for the 21st 
century workforce.
    The Manager's Amendment also includes a section on 21st 
Century Graduate Education. This language is based on Ms. 
Giffords' bill, H.R. 4968. NSF has long provided financial 
support to graduate students through fellowships and 
traineeships, but there have been limited programs focused on 
ensuring that today's STEM graduate students are graduating 
with the broader set of skills necessary to compete for 21st 
century jobs in all sectors, including academia, industry and 
government. This provision helps fill this gap in NSF's current 
portfolio.
    Once again, I want to thank my colleagues, Mr. Hill, Ms. 
Kosmas and Ms. Giffords for their excellent contributions to 
this legislation and my Republican colleagues and their staff 
for all their hard work to help strengthen and clarify the 
language in both this amendment and the underlying bill, and I 
urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
    [The prepared statement of Chairman Lipinski follows:]
             Prepared Statement of Chairman Daniel Lipinski
    This manager's amendment makes a number of technical and clarifying 
changes to the legislation in addition to codifying the important 
statistical work of the Foundation and adding three new sections that 
focus on the critical issues of promoting innovation and improving STEM 
education.
    First, the amendment adds a new section that codifies the function 
of the NSF Division of Science Resource Statistics (SRS) as the central 
Federal clearinghouse for objective data on the scientific and 
engineering enterprise and the state of U.S. STEM education. As you may 
know, SRS is responsible for the biennial Science and Engineering 
Indicators report that the Congress relies so heavily on for an 
understanding of the state of U.S. competitiveness in science and 
technology. This section in reality is nothing more than a name change 
for SRS, but such a name change confers on them a status that truly 
reflects the critical work they do.
    The next main section, Partnerships for Innovation, was introduced 
earlier as H.R. 4998 by Congressman Hill. This section requires the 
Director of NSF to carry out a program to support partnerships between 
institutions of higher education and private sector entities in order 
to promote innovation and increase the economic and social impact of 
their research. The ultimate goal is for these kinds of partnerships 
between diverse institutions and local industry to help spur regional 
economic growth and ensure a well prepared STEM workforce for local 
jobs.
    Finally, the amendment introduces to the legislation two sections 
focused specifically on institutional reform in undergraduate and 
graduate STEM education. I want to thank Ms. Kosmas for introducing her 
bill, H.R. 4955, on transforming undergraduate education in STEM, which 
has been incorporated into the manager's amendment. This section 
authorizes a program of grants to colleges and universities to reform 
undergraduate STEM education, both to increase the number of STEM 
graduates and to improve STEM education for all students. This good 
provision will go a long way in spurring the kind of institutional 
transformation that will result in better preparation of our graduates 
for the 21St century workforce.
    The manager's amendment also includes a section on 21St Century 
Graduate Education. This language is based on a bill that Ms. Giffords 
introduced recently, H.R. 4968. NSF has long provided financial support 
to graduate students through fellowships and traineeships. But there 
have been limited programs focused on ensuring that today's STEM 
graduate students are graduating with the broader set of skills 
necessary to compete for 21St century jobs in all sectors, including 
academia, industry and government. This provision helps fill this gap 
in NSF's current portfolio.
    Once again, I want to thank my colleagues Mr. Hill, Ms. Kosmas, and 
Ms. Giffords for their excellent contributions to this legislation, and 
my Republican colleagues and their staff for all of their hard work to 
help strengthen and clarify the language in both this amendment and the 
underlying bill, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.


    Chairman Lipinski. Is there further discussion on the 
amendment? The Chair recognizes Dr. Ehlers.
    Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am generally 
supportive of the Manager's Amendment that you have offered. I 
understand that we are more explicitly codifying the science 
and engineering statistics office at the National Science 
Foundation and the Partnerships for Innovation program. In 
addition, we are strengthening STEM education for 
undergraduates, broadening graduate education opportunities and 
making other minor changes to the bill based on feedback from 
members and various stakeholders.
    My only concern is with specific regard to the Partnerships 
for Innovation section. I want to make sure that we have the 
benefit of hearing what comes out of the workshop NSF is 
holding on this topic within the next few weeks. I hope that 
you will continue to work with us to ensure that this language 
that we eventually adopt best captures what will make this 
program most effective at the Foundation, and with that, I 
yield back.
    Chairman Lipinski. Dr. Ehlers, would you yield to me to 
respond on that?
    Mr. Ehlers. Yes, please proceed.
    Chairman Lipinski. The workshop that is going to take 
place, we will have the opportunity to incorporate any 
suggestions, any recommendations from that workshop into this 
before we proceed. We will be moving forward in two weeks in 
Full Committee, incorporating this legislation into the America 
COMPETES Act, and you can be assured that we will work to 
incorporate what comes out of that workshop.
    Mr. Ehlers. Thank you.
    Chairman Lipinski. Any further discussion on the amendment? 
The Chair recognizes Dr. Baird.
    Mr. Baird. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I commend you for 
this outstanding piece of work and like my colleague, Mr. 
Ehlers, am supportive of the Manager's Amendment.
    I have had the opportunity in recent months to meet with a 
number of nonprofit innovators who are using technology and 
other skills to create products that might not be commercially 
competitive but made a tremendously important niche, for 
example, software or hardware applications for people with 
disabilities, orphan drugs, et cetera. By the nature of these 
enterprises and their products, they are not for profit and 
intentionally so, and for too long they have been excluded from 
federal programs like SBIR and to some degree from NSF 
competition. Hence, within the Partnership for Innovation, if 
we look at line 15 of page 4, I would hope the chairman will be 
amenable--I am not going to offer it as an amendment here today 
but I would hope the Chair would be amenable to adding the word 
``nonprofit'' there on line 15 or in section B where it says 
``may include other institutions of higher education, public 
institutions and private-sector entities,'' the premise being 
that all of the rationale for including those entities as 
partnerships would also apply to not-for-profit sectors such as 
I have just described.
    So if the Chair would be amenable to considering this 
between now and final passage, I would be grateful. If not, I 
would probably offer it as an amendment today but I don't think 
it is probably necessary.
    Chairman Lipinski. Dr. Baird, we will work with you on that 
to see what we can do there. It sounds like an ostensible 
recommendation, so we will work with you as we move forward.
    Mr. Baird. I thank the Chair.
    Chairman Lipinski. Is there any further discussion on the 
amendment? If no, the vote will occur on the amendment. All in 
favor, say aye. All opposed, say no. The ayes have it and the 
amendment is agreed to.
    The second amendment on the roster is an amendment offered 
by the Chair. The clerk will report the amendment.
    The Clerk. Amendment number 060, amendment to the Committee 
Print offered by Mr. Lipinski of Illinois.
    Chairman Lipinski. I ask unanimous consent to dispense with 
the reading. Without objection, so ordered. I recognize myself 
for five minutes to explain the amendment.
    The amendment at the desk would create an innovation 
inducement prize pilot program at the National Science 
Foundation. In recent years, innovation inducement prizes have 
been offered not only by the private sector but also by the 
Federal Government through NASA, the DOE and the Department of 
Defense. Although the NSF has not used such prizes, language in 
the 2006 appropriations bill led to a National Academy study of 
the idea. The study concluded that an ambitious program of 
innovation inducement prize contests will be a sound investment 
in strengthening the infrastructure for U.S. innovation. Thus, 
they recommended that NSF embrace this challenge as an 
opportunity both to advance science and engineering and to 
learn a great deal more than we now know about what may prove 
to be a valuable mode of support for research and innovation. 
My amendment would simply implement the recommendations of this 
report by creating a small pilot program at NSF to explore what 
could be a valuable mode of support for research and 
innovation. Specifically, it authorizes $12 million for up to 
five prizes that could run for as many as seven years.
    I see two primary benefits of such a program. First, it is 
another way to encourage high-risk, high-reward research unlike 
a traditional grant proposal which necessarily focuses on 
incremental challenges that can be solved during the grant 
period. A prize contest can highlight important problems that 
nobody knows how to solve. Second, if it is done right, a prize 
program can help the NSF and the scientific endeavor with 
public relations. It can generate excitement and interest in 
the frontiers of science. There are other benefits too, such as 
researching a broader range--reaching a broader range of 
researchers than a traditional grant.
    But I want to caution that not all problems are well suited 
to innovation inducement prizes, and this is in no way intended 
to replace the grant making that the NSF does so well. I would 
also like to point out that the intent of this program is to 
promote innovation in basic science and engineering rather than 
the creation of specific technologies or products.
    Ultimately, the goal of this amendment is to further 
diversify our approach to funding science and engineering. I 
think there are a number of potential benefits and that a pilot 
program is the right way to see exactly how useful innovation 
inducement prizes can be. I urge my colleagues to support this 
amendment.
    [The prepared statement of Chairman Lipinski follows:]
             Prepared Statement of Chairman Daniel Lipinski
    The amendment at the desk would create an innovation inducement 
prize pilot program at the National Science Foundation.
    The idea of innovation.inducement prizes at the NSF may be new to 
some of you, so let me briefly offer some background before getting 
into the details of my amendment. Governments have been offering prize 
purses for solutions to predefined scientific or technological problems 
since at least 1714, when the British government offered the 
``Longitude Prize'' for improvements in navigation at sea. This prize 
resulted in advances in astronomy and timekeeping. Since then, we have 
seen prizes offered in everything from aviation to biomedicine to pure 
mathematics.
    Innovation inducement prizes have been used by NASA, the DOE, the 
Department of Defense, and the private sector, but they have not been 
used by the NSF. In 2006, appropriations language led to a National 
Academies study of the idea, one which concluded that innovation 
inducement prizes would be ``a sound investment in strengthening the 
infrastructure for U.S. innovation.''
    My amendment would implement the recommendations of this report, 
creating a small pilot program at the NSF to explore what could be a 
valuable mode of support for research and innovation. Specifically, it 
authorizes $12 M for up to 5 prize contests that could run for as many 
as 7 years.
    I see two primary benefits to such a program. First, it is another 
way to encourage high-risk/high-reward research. Unlike a traditional 
grant proposal, which necessarily focuses on incremental challenges 
that can be solved during the grant period, a prize contest can 
highlight important problems that nobody knows how to solve. Second, if 
it's done right, a prize program can help science with its public 
relations problem. It can generate excitement and interest in the 
frontiers of science, like what the Netflix prize did for an obscure 
computer science problem or the X-prize did for space flight.
    There are other benefits too, such as reaching a broader range of 
researchers than a traditional grant. But I want to caution that not 
all problems are well suited to innovation inducement prizes, and that 
this is in no way intended to replace the grant-making that the NSF 
does so well. I would also like to point out that the intent of this 
program is to promote innovation in basic science and engineering 
rather than the creation of specific technologies or products.
    Ultimately the goal of this amendment is to further diversify our 
approach to funding science and engineering. I think there are a number 
of potential benefits, and that a pilot program is the right way to see 
exactly how useful innovation inducement prizes can be.
    I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

    Is there any further discussion on the amendment? The Chair 
recognizes Dr. Ehlers.
    Mr. Ehlers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think prizes are an 
excellent idea. They have a place and they have been used very 
effectively in certain areas. I have some concerns about NSF 
being part of that process. I am not aware of any evidence that 
they are equipped at this point to implement the program in an 
effective manner, and I am also concerned about statements made 
by the current Director who as you know is leaving shortly, 
when he says at this type of prize is not appropriate for the 
National Science Foundation, and I think we need further 
conversations with each other and with the outgoing Director 
and perhaps with the National Science Board itself as to 
whether or not this is an appropriate activity for the National 
Science Foundation and how this activity would mesh with their 
current grant-making efforts. I am not in the camp of being 
opposed to something just because it is new, but I am in the 
camp that says examine it very carefully when you have a system 
that is working effectively, and we are not sure how a new 
system might impact the current system. So I am just saying, I 
am willing to consider it, and I think we should look more 
carefully at it than we have, and particularly review what the 
outgoing Director says and perhaps if we can wait a while, what 
the incoming Director prefers about this, and also get some 
reaction from the scientific community as to whether or not 
they think it is an appropriate activity for the National 
Science Foundation.
    So I am basically taking the slow approach and say let us 
look at this carefully and decide what we really will be doing, 
will it be effective or will it not be. I will yield back.
    Chairman Lipinski. Dr. Ehlers, I recognize your concerns. 
That is why we are moving forward with this as a pilot project. 
The National Academies' report, as I mentioned in my statement, 
did recommend that NSF do this. I think the pilot will present 
an opportunity to see how successful NSF can be with the 
inducement prize approach to funding research. Clearly, this is 
a very, very small piece of what the NSF is going to be 
authorized for as compared to the grants that will be 
authorized in this bill, and so I think that this is the right 
first step to be making to have such a pilot program, and I 
know that we have a new NSF Director coming in and certainly we 
will work with him or her on how to best do this at the NSF, 
but I think this is the proper way to be going about moving 
forward on this, and if there are further enhancements, further 
revisions that need to be made as the process moves along, we 
will see if we have an NSF--when we will have the NSF Director 
in place. We are not certain right now what the time period is 
going to be but I think moving ahead with the inducement prize 
pilot program is the right move at this time.
    Is there further discussion on this? Mr. Neugebauer.
    Mr. Neugebauer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and, you know, I 
love the incentive program. I came from about 25 years of 
incentive that if you sold something, you got to eat, and so I 
understand incentives extremely well and I appreciate I think 
the spirit of which the chairman is headed.
    You know, when I look at this agency, I think they are 
already giving out prizes because basically they are granting 
money hopefully for projects that show innovation and promise 
and so I guess I am having a little bit of a problem of 
understanding, you know, when do you get a grant and when do 
you get a prize and whether this is the appropriate forum for 
that kind of a program. Do you follow what I am saying? Because 
hopefully every billion dollar or every single dollar that we 
are authorizing here is going for projects that are innovation 
and show promise and that we shouldn't be just looking for one, 
that they all ought to meet that criteria, so I appreciate the 
Chairman's being innovative and creative here. There may be a 
place in our jurisdiction here of where this is appropriate 
place to be but I am questioning if this is the place for that 
to be since I hope that is already the job that they are doing, 
and I would yield to the gentleman to respond to that.
    Chairman Lipinski. Well, I think what you started out your 
statement with, saying that the incentive that if you produce, 
then you can eat, basically that is what we are looking at here 
with the inducement prizes. With most grants, you have a 
proposal of research. You hope to find results. You are looking 
to find results but you don't know what that is going to be. 
This is a situation where no money is going to anyone until 
they produce a result that is being sought, and these are going 
to be results that are determined, that the NSF determines, 
that are important in terms of innovation, finding solutions to 
problems, whatever it is that the NSF decides are important 
results they are looking for. It is just another way of doing 
this rather than saying upfront, here is the money and 
hopefully this research will yield a result. It is, you go out 
there, do the work, find the result, and if you do, then you 
get the prize, and in many ways I think that it is just a 
different way of going about it, but it is exactly what you 
said. If you don't produce, you don't eat, and I think that is 
something good to look at, at least, and the pilot program is a 
way to look at that. I yield back.
    Mr. Neugebauer. Reclaiming my time. Well, I guess the 
question I have is that is there anything in the way that we 
have structured NSF now that they couldn't do that without--in 
other words, if somebody brings, you know, a good idea to the 
table or a successful solution, that NSF couldn't reward them. 
Because generally what those projects, while they may be moving 
in a direction, you know, they are a new discovery but 
generally they require refinement before commercialization and 
generally I would think that is what you are looking for here 
is an idea that somebody has come up with, it is a great idea, 
you want to give them a prize for it but at some point in time 
generally there is another step or two to commercialize those 
good ideas, and is there anything that prevents them from--I 
believe they have the authority to do that right now.
    Chairman Lipinski. My understanding is that right now that 
is not the way that the NSF works, that they do not have 
authorization right now to offer a prize. It is all just 
upfront that you are given--you put in a proposal. If that 
proposal is determined-it will be funded, you will receive the 
grant, and that is the only way that NSF right now is 
authorized to give out the money. It would need authorization 
to be able to do this.
    Mr. Neugebauer. I think there is some disagreement whether 
that is the case or not. I am not a lawyer so I am not going 
to----
    Chairman Lipinski. I am not one either.
    Mr. Neugebauer. Well, could we get feedback from counsel on 
whether you think this currently--that this requires--
sometimes, you know, the bureaucrats want to, you know, get 
Congress to say they can do what they already have the ability 
to do.
    The Counsel. I believe, Congressman, we would have to 
verify this but I believe the sticking issue could be how 
appropriations works for the National Science Foundation. The 
way the prize program language is written, NSF can hold onto 
the money for seven years before they reprogram it to allow the 
prize program to play out. Normally NSF is given appropriations 
on an annual basis and they can't just hold onto money 
indefinitely without committing it, obligating it to some 
research project or such things. So we can go back and verify 
that and get back to you, but that is my suspicion, that the 
authorization is lacking because of the appropriations issue.
    Chairman Gordon. Will the gentleman yield? I think that the 
distinction here is that currently, the NSF can give grants for 
good idea. What Mr. Lipinski wants to do is be able to give a 
grant for a good product, so that is, you know--or a good 
result, you could say. So I think that is really the 
distinction.
    Mr. Neugebauer. But isn't the purpose of NSF more for basic 
research than applied? I mean, we are moving in a different 
direction here? I mean----
    Chairman Lipinski. This is something that I want to make 
sure that we don't get into the realm of thinking that this is 
about producing a product, because we look at other prizes and 
we sometimes think well, it is going--we are talking about a 
product. There are other potential prizes. We just had the Clay 
Math Institution's Millennium Challenge Prize. The Poincare 
conjecture was solved under this program. It was a 100-year-old 
topology problem. So it was purely a mathematical problem. We 
are looking at prizes here not to be moving to, okay, you get a 
prize for producing a product, but there are breakthroughs that 
are being sought in science and technology, not necessarily 
products but breakthroughs that are being sought that 
inducement prizes could play an important role in providing 
that incentive.
    Is there further discussion on this amendment? The Chair 
recognizes Mr. Inglis.
    Mr. Inglis. The Chairman and I share co-paternity with the 
H-Prize, so I am very excited about prizes. It is a great idea 
to have prizes that incentivize breakthrough discoveries. One 
of the things we learned as you recall from Peter Diamandis, 
Chairman of the X PRIZE, testifying here a while back is that--
when we were working on the H-Prize--is that prizes are 
successful if they have clearly defined metrics just beyond 
what is currently achievable, and that of course was the secret 
to the X PRIZE and it worked very well. That's what Dr. 
Lipinski and I worked on in coming up with the H-Prize, and 
that is underway, and of course the Department of Energy will 
now be administering that prize. Along the way, we heard from 
the National Science Foundation, as you recall, that they 
really didn't want to administer that prize, which it made me 
scratch my head because it is rare that a federal agency says 
that they don't want more money or authority, and so--and I am 
not sure that I am here to advocate strongly for the position 
of agreeing with them, because it does seem that NSF is a place 
that could be very involved in the creative process of figuring 
out what the prize metric should be and putting them just 
beyond what is achievable, but what they told us back in the H-
Prize is that they didn't