Segment 3 Of 9 Previous Hearing Segment(2) Next Hearing Segment(4)
SPEAKERS CONTENTS INSERTS
Page 36 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Chapter I—Legislative Activities of the Committee on Science
1.1—P.L. 107–50, Small Business Technology Transfer Program Reauthorization Act of 2001 (H.R. 1860)
Background and Summary of Legislation
Amends the Small Business Act to: (1) increase and extend through FY 2009 the authorization of appropriations for the Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Program; (2) increase to $750,000 the maximum award for small businesses participating in the second phase of an STTR Program; (3) require each Federal agency that is required to establish an STTR Program to implement an outreach program to research institutions and small businesses; (4) require the Administrator of the Small Business Administration (SBA) to modify a certain SBA policy directive with respect to Federal funding awards; (5) require each of the above agencies to collect and maintain information necessary to assess its STTR Program; (6) require STTR information to be included in agency databases currently maintaining Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program information; and (7) require STTR information to be included in such agencies' congressional reporting requirements.
Section 6—STTR Program Data Collection
Requires the Administrator to include within an annual report on SBIR and STTR programs the number of proposals received from, and total amounts awarded to, HUBZone small businesses under each program.
Page 37 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 7—STTR Program-Wide Model Agreement for Intellectual Property Rights
Directs the Administrator to promulgate regulations to establish a single model agreement for use in the STTR program that allocates between small businesses and research institutions intellectual property rights and any rights to carry out follow-on research, development, or commercialization. Requires each Federal agency that adopts an STTR program to adopt such model agreement.
Section 8—Fast Program Assistance for Women-Owned and Minority-Owned Small Business Concerns and Concerns Located in Areas Not Participating in SBIR and STTR
Revises provisions concerning the Federal and State Technology Partnership Program (a program to strengthen the technological competitiveness of small businesses) to require the Administrator and the SBIR Program managers to consider whether an SBIR Program proposal addresses the needs of small businesses owned and controlled by women and minorities located in areas not participating in SBIR and STTR programs. Requires the Administrator to promulgate regulations establishing standards for the consideration of such proposals.
Legislative History
Representative Vernon Ehlers, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards, introduced H.R. 1860 on May 16, 2001 and it was referred to the Committees on Small Business and Science. On May 18, 2001, the Science Committee referred the bill to the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards. It was discharged from the Committee on September 21, 2001. The House considered the bill under suspension of the rules on September 24, 2001 and it was agreed to by voice vote.
Page 38 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
The measure was received in the Senate on September 25, 2001 and it passed without amendment by unanimous consent on September 26, 2001. On October 15, 2001, the President signed the bill and it became P.L. 107–50.
1.2—P.L. 107–74, To prevent the elimination of certain reports (H.R. 1042)
Background and Summary of Legislation
Prohibits the application of the Federal Reports Elimination and Sunset Act of 1995 with respect to specified reports relevant to the jurisdiction of the House Committee on Science, including certain reports originating from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Science Foundation, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Legislative History
H.R. 1042 was introduced in the House by Representative Felix Grucci on March 15, 2001 and was referred to the Committee on Science. The House considered the bill under suspension of the rules on March 21, 2001 and it was agreed to by Y–414, N–2 (Roll Call No. 54).
The measure was received in the Senate on March 22, 2001 and was referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs. It was reported without amendment by the Committee on October 31, 2001 and passed the Senate by unanimous consent on November 25, 2001.
Page 39 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
H.R. 1042 was signed by the President on November 28, 2001, becoming P.L. 107–74.
1.3—P.L. 107–107, National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2002 (S. 1438)
Background and Summary of Legislation
On October 17, 2002, the Speaker appointed Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert, Subcommittee on Research Chairman Nick Smith, Representative Lamar Smith, and Science Committee Ranking Minority Member Ralph Hall as additional conferees to S. 1438, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002, for consideration of Sections 1071 and 1124 of the Senate bill. Subcommittee on Environment, Technology and Standards Chairman Vernon Ehlers was appointed by the Speaker in lieu of Representative Smith for consideration of Section 1124.
These conference committee deliberations, contained in H.Rept. 107–333 (Conference Report to accompany S. 1438), resulted in the enactment of Sections 1061 and 1115 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002 (P.L. 107–107), which was signed into law by the President on December 28, 2001. Descriptions of these provisions follow.
Section 1061—Assistance for Firefighters
The Senate bill contained a provision (Section 1071) that would increase the authorization of appropriations for federal grants to state or local firefighters in section 33 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974, as added by title XVII of the Floyd D. Spence National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001, from $300.0 million to $600.0 million in fiscal year 2002, and would extend and increase the authorizations to $800.0 million in fiscal year 2003 and $1.0 billion in fiscal year 2004. The House amendment contained a provision (Section 1049) that would name the program after the late Floyd D. Spence and would state the sense of Congress that the grant program should be reauthorized at increased funding levels. The House receded with an amendment that would increase the authorization of appropriations for these grants to $900.0 million per year for fiscal years 2002, 2003 and 2004, clarify that grants under this program would be available for training and equipment to respond to terrorism or the use of weapons of mass destruction, and specify that up to three percent of the funds authorized for these grants could be used for administration of the grant program by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Page 40 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 1115—Participation of Personnel in Technical Standards Development Activities
The Senate bill contained a provision (Section 1124) that would amend the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 3701) to allow appropriated funds to be used by Federal employees to participate in meetings to set technical standards for products, manufacturing processes, and management practices. The House amendment contained no similar provision. The House receded and the provision was adopted.
1.4—P.L. 107–171, Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (H.R. 2646)
Background and Summary of Legislation
On March 7, 2002, the Speaker appointed Science Committee Chairman Sherwood L. Boehlert, Subcommittee on Energy Chairman Roscoe G. Bartlett and Committee Ranking Minority Member Ralph Hall as additional conferees to H.R. 2646, the Farm Security Act of 2001 for consideration of provisions in the Senate-passed bill relating to certain forestry activities (Sections 808 and 811), agricultural energy measures (Section 902 and 903) and the Office of a Veterinary Advisor (Section 1079). The conference committee deliberations contained in H.Rept. 107–424 (Conference Report to accompany H.R. 2646), resulted in the enactment of sections 8003 and 9001–9009, which was signed into law by the President on May 13, 2002. Descriptions of these provisions follow:
Title VIII: Forestry—
Page 41 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 8003—Enhanced Community Fire Protection
Amends section 10 of the Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 with the following changes:
(a) Cooperative Management Related to Wildfire Threats—Authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture (the ''Secretary'') to cooperate with State forester and equivalent State officials in the management of lands in the United States to: (1) aid in wildfire prevention and control; (2) protect communities from wildfire threats; (3) enhance the growth and maintenance of trees and forests that promote overall forest health; and (4) ensure the continued production of all forest resources, including timber, outdoor recreation opportunities, wildlife habitat, and clean water, through conservation of forest cover on watersheds, shelterbelts, and windbreaks;
(b) Community and Private Land Fire Assistance Program—Directs the Secretary to establish a Community and Private Land Fire Assistance program to: (1) focus the Federal role in promoting optimal firefighting efficiency at the Federal, State, and local levels; (2) augment Federal projects that establish landscape level protection from wildfires; (3) expand outreach and education programs to homeowners and communities about fire protection; and (4) establish space around homes and property of private landowners that is defensible against wildfires;
Directs that the program be administered by the Forest Service and implemented through State foresters or equivalent State officials;
Page 42 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Authorizes the Secretary, in consultation with the State forester or equivalent State official, to undertake on non-Federal lands: (1) fuel hazard mitigation and prevention; (2) invasive species management; (3) multi-resource wildfire planning; (4) community protection planning; (5) community and landowner education enterprises, including the FIREWISE program; (6) market development and expansion; (7) improved wood utilization; and (8) special restoration projects; authorizes specified FY 2002 through 2007 appropriations.
Title IX: Energy—
Title IX of the bill, includes provisions intended to improve commercial markets for agricultural products which can be used to generate energy or where their substitution for petroleum-based products can assist in reducing domestic consumption of foreign oil. In addition, the title provides Federal financial assistance and other incentives to encourage agricultural producers to implement energy conservation and efficiency measures.
Section 9001—Definitions
Establishes a number of definitions of key terms used in the title, including ''Administrator,'' ''biobased product,'' ''biomass,'' ''rural small business,'' and ''Secretary.''
Section 9002—Federal Procurement of Biobased Products
Requires Federal agencies to give preference to items containing the highest percentage of biobased products practicable unless such items are not comparable in price, performance and availability to non-biobased products. Calls for the development of Federal guidelines for use by procuring agencies. Directs the Secretary (defined in section 9001 as the Secretary of Agriculture) to develop a labeling program for biobased products similar to the EPA's Energy Star program. Provides program funding through October 1, 2007.
Page 43 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 9003—Biorefinery Development Grants
Directs the Secretary to make grants to eligible entities to develop and construct biorefineries for projects that demonstrate the commercial viability of biomass conversion to fuels or chemicals. Provides funding through October 1, 2007.
Section 9004—Biodiesel Fuel Education Program
Directs the Secretary to make competitive grants to eligible entities to educate governmental and private entities that operate vehicle fleets, other interested entities, and the public about the benefits of biodiesel fuel use.
Section 9005—Energy Audit and Renewable Energy Development Program
Directs the Secretary to make competitive grants to eligible entities to carry out a program to assist farmers, ranchers, and rural small businesses in becoming more energy efficient and in using renewable energy technology and resources.
Section 9006—Renewable Energy Systems and Energy Efficiency Improvements
Directs the Secretary to make loans, loan guarantees and grants to farmers, ranchers, and rural small businesses to (1) purchase renewable energy systems, and (2) make energy efficiency improvements.
Page 44 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 9007—Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies
Directs the Secretary and the Secretary of Energy to enter into a memorandum of understanding under which they shall (1) cooperate in the application of hydrogen and fuel cell technology programs for rural communities and agricultural producers, and (2) work together to disseminate information to rural communities and agricultural producers on potential applications of hydrogen and fuel cell technologies.
Section 9008—Biomass Research and Development
Amends the Biomass Research and Development Act of 2000 to provide funding through October 1, 2007 and extend authority through September 30, 2007.
Section 9009—Cooperative Research and Extension Projects
Amends section 221 of the Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000 with the following changes:
(d) Cooperative Research—Directs the Secretary to establish a carbon sequestration research and development program to promote understanding of: (1) the net sequestration of organic carbon in soil, plants and trees; and (2) the net emissions of other greenhouse gases from agriculture;
Directs the Secretary to: (1) carry out carbon sequestration-related research in the areas of agronomy, agricultural economics, forestry, and other agricultural sciences; and (2) develop benchmark standards for measuring soil and plant carbon content;
Page 45 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
(e) Extension Projects—Authorizes the Secretary, in cooperation with departments and agencies participating in the U.S. Global Change Research Program and other defined entities, to implement extension projects to monitor the carbon sequestering benefits of conservation practices and the exchange of greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture; and
Authorizes FY 2002 through 2007 appropriations for both subsections.
Legislative History
H.R. 2646 was introduced in the House on July 26, 2001 by Representative Larry Combest and was referred to the Committee on Agriculture. It was reported out on August 2, 2001 and was sequentially referred to the Committee on International Relations where it was reported (amended) on September 10, 2001. The House adopted an amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union; the measure passed on October 5, 2001 by: Y–291, N–120 (Roll Call No. 371).
The measure was received in the Senate on October 9, 2001. By unanimous consent, the Senate struck all after the enacting clause and substituted the language of S. 1731 and passed the amended bill by: Y–58, N–40 (Roll Call No. 30).
A House-Senate conference negotiated a compromise and the Conference Report (H.Rept. 107–424) was filed on May 1, 2002. On May 2, 2002, the House agreed the Conference Report by: Y–280, N–141 (Roll Call No. 103) and the Senate agreed to the report on May 8, 2002 by: Y–64, N–35 (Roll Call No. 103). The President signed the measure on May 13, 2002 and it became P.L. 107–171.
Page 46 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
1.5—P.L. 107–231, National Construction Safety Team Act (H.R. 4687)
Background and Summary of Legislation
The aftermath of the collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) revealed serious flaws in how the Federal Government carries out investigations of major building failures. The National Science Foundation (NSF), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) all were involved in investigating this disaster in some way. However, none of these agencies was prepared to conduct a comprehensive and thorough investigation immediately following the collapse of the WTC buildings. In addition, the Federal efforts that were undertaken to study the building failures were hindered by many impediments: no Federal agency was clearly charged with investigating building failures; nothing ensured that an investigation would begin quickly enough to preserve evidence; no Federal agency had the investigative authority to ensure access to all needed information; nothing ensured that the public was kept informed of the progress of the investigation; and inadequate funding limited the efforts that were undertaken. Families of the victims, outside experts, and NIST itself have called for future investigations to be given additional investigative authorities like those used by the National Transportation Safety Board.
The National Construction Safety Team Act authorizes the Director of NIST to establish National Construction Safety Teams to investigate building failures in the wake of an event that causes significant loss of life or had the potential to cause the significant lose of life. The legislation also builds on the procedures followed by FEMA to investigate building failures and on the existing building authority Congress vested in NIST. The Act is designed to address each of the impediments that hindered the WTC investigation.
Page 47 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
The purpose of a Team's investigation is to improve the safety and structural integrity of buildings in the United States. It requires Teams to: (1) establish the likely technical cause(s) of the building failure; (2) evaluate the technical aspects of evacuation and emergency response procedures; (3) recommend specific improvements to building standards, codes, and practices; (4) recommend research and other appropriate actions needed to improve the structural safety of buildings and evacuation and emergency response procedures.
In carrying out an investigation Teams are authorized to: (1) enter property where a building failure has occurred or where relevant materials are located; (2) inspect related records, facilities, and building components and materials; (3) move appropriate records, components, and materials; and (4) subpoena necessary witnesses and evidence.
When conducting an investigation Teams must: (1) conduct investigative actions in a way that does not interfere unnecessarily with building services or materials and that preserves evidence related to the building failure; (2) coordinate investigations with search and rescue efforts and with qualified researchers conducting engineering or scientific research relating to the building failure; and (3) cooperate with State and local authorities carrying out any activities related to a Team's investigation.
The legislation directs NIST to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the head of each Federal agency that may conduct or sponsor a related investigation, providing for coordination of investigations. It grants a Team investigation priority over any other investigation of any other Federal agency, with the exception of related investigations conducted by the National Transportation Safety Board or building failures that may have been caused by criminal acts.
Page 48 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Further the legislation requires: (1) the Director, on behalf of a Team, to hold public briefings on investigations, including final briefings after public reports required by this Act are issued; and (2) Teams to issue public reports after completing investigations, including an analysis of the cause of the building failure and any recommendations for changes to evacuation and emergency response procedures, improvements to building standards, and actions needed to prevent future failures. Requires NIST to review such reports, to conduct or encourage appropriate recommended research, and to promote adoption of Team recommendations by the Federal Government and other agencies and organizations.
The legislation also requires the Director to: (1) report to specified congressional committees on Team investigations and recommendations, including on the extent to which those recommendations have been implemented, and on NIST actions to improve building safety and structural integrity in response; and (2) establish an advisory committee to advise the Director on carrying out this Act and to review the procedures developed for the establishment and deployment of Teams and Team reports. It also requires such advisory committee to transmit to Congress annual reports that include: (1) an evaluation of Team activities, along with recommendations for improving Team operation and effectiveness; and (2) an assessment of the implementation of Team recommendations.
Finally the legislation states that the authorities and restrictions applicable under this Act to the Director and Teams shall apply to NIST activities in response to the attacks of September 11, 2001, and it authorizes NIST to use funds otherwise authorized by law to carry out this Act.
Page 49 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
H.R. 4687 was introduced by Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert on May 9, 2002 and it was referred to the Committee on Science.
The House Science Committee met on May 22, 2002 to consider H.R. 4687. Chairman Boehlert offered several technical amendments to the bill, which were considered en bloc and adopted by voice vote. The Committee favorably reported the bill as amended, by voice vote.
The Committee on Science filed H.Rept. 107–530 on June 25, 2002.
The House considered H.R. 4687 on July 12, 2002. An amendment was offered by Chairman Boehlert to clarify that members of investigative teams should be treated as contract employees; clarify that team members not recommend code changes or further research in the unlikely event that they do not believe any code changes or further research is necessary; expand the types of criminal investigations that would require NIST to stop serving as the lead agency at the site of a building collapse; clarifies how certain decisions of the Director of NIST can be enforced; clarifies that all expenditures in the bill are subject to appropriations; clarifies in two separate places that the bill gives NIST no regulatory authority over the adoption of building standards, codes and practices; and changes the authorization to ''such sums as may be necessary.'' The amendment was adopted by voice vote.
The House then passed H.R. 4687, as amended, by: Y–338, N–23 (Roll Call No. 295). It was received in the Senate on July 15, 2002. Senator Ernest Hollings offered an amendment to clarify several technical provisions in the legislation. The measure passed the Senate, as amended, by a voice vote on September 9, 2002.
Page 50 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
The House considered H.R. 4687 as amended by the Senate on September 17, 2002 and adopted the measure by voice vote.
The President signed the measure on October 1, 2002, and it became P.L. 107–231.
1.6—P.L. 107–252, Help America Vote Act of 2002 (H.R. 3295)
Background and Summary of Legislation
H.R. 3295, the Help America Vote Act, is a comprehensive election reform bill passed in response to the numerous problems that surfaced during the 2000 election. It establishes a new entity, the Election Assistance Commission, to provide assistance to states in administering Federal elections.
The bill also includes provisions from H.R. 2275, the Voting Technology Standards Act, that establish a Technical Standards Development Committee to assist the Election Assistance Commission by recommending standards to ensure the usability, accuracy, security, accessibility, and integrity of voting systems and voting equipment.
Additional language from H.R. 2275 incorporated into the Help America Vote Act directs the Commission to provide for the testing, certification, decertification, and recertification of voting system hardware and software by accredited laboratories, which are recommended for accreditation by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The bill also authorizes the Commission, assisted by the National Institute for Standards and Technology, to make grants to entities for voting equipment and technology research and development, and grants for pilot programs to try out new voting systems and equipment technologies.
Page 51 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
On November 14, 2001, Representative Bob Ney introduced H.R. 3295, the Help America Vote Act, which incorporated provisions from H.R. 2275, the Voting Technology Standards Act, introduced on June 21, 2001 by Representative Vernon Ehlers. H.R. 3295 was referred to the Committees on House Administration, Judiciary, Science, Government Reform, and Armed Services. The House Administration Committee ordered the measure reported, as amended on December 10, 2001 and filed H.Rept. 107–329.
The Committee on Science discharged the bill on December 10, 2001, as did the Judiciary, Government Reform and Armed Services Committees.
On December 12, 2001, the measure passed the House, as amended, by: Y–362, N–63 (Roll Call No. 489). It was then received in the Senate and referred to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration.
On April 11, 2002, the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration discharged the measure. The measure passed the Senate the same day with an amendment substituting the text of S. 565, the Equal Protection of Voting Rights Act, in place of the House-passed bill.
On October 8, 2002 the Conference Committee filed H.Rept. 107–730. The House agreed to the Conference Report on April 11, 2002 (Roll Call No. 462), and the Senate on October 8 (Record Vote No. 238). H.R. 3295 was signed by the President on October 29, 2002 and became P.L. 107–252.
Page 52 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
1.7—P.L. 107–253, Inland Flood Forecasting and Warning System Act of 2002 (H.R. 2486)
Background and Summary of Legislation
In 1999, Hurricane Floyd killed 48 people and caused nearly $3 billion in property damage, primarily through the flooding of inland communities. In 2000, Tropical Storm Allison unexpectedly dumped more than 35 inches of rain in Texas and traveled from Texas eastward through much of the Southeast United States resulting in more than 50 deaths, again primarily as a result of inland flooding. While the National Weather Service has the ability to accurately predict most flood events, it has difficulty in forecasting coastal and estuary-inland flooding events that are caused by tropical cyclones. In addition, the flood warning index (or scale) currently used by the National Weather Service does not include enough information about the potential risks and dangers posed by expected floods.
The United States Weather Research Program (USWRP) is a $9 million multi-agency collaborative effort of research communities, academia, and government. The focus of the program is to integrate weather-related research and new developments in technology with current operational weather products. The government participants include the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which houses USWRP, the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautic and Space Administration (NASA), and the Department of Defense.
H.R. 2486, the Inland Flood Forecasting and Warning System Act of 2002, requires NOAA, through the USWRP, to: (1) improve the capability to forecast accurately inland flooding through research and modeling; (2) develop, test, and deploy a new flood warning index that will give the public and emergency management officials fuller, clearer, and more accurate information about the risks and dangers posed by expected floods; (3) train emergency management officials, National Weather Service personnel, meteorologists, and others regarding improved forecasting techniques for inland flooding, risk management techniques, and use of such flood warning index; (4) conduct outreach and education activities for local meteorologists and the public regarding the dangers and risks associated with inland flooding and the use and understanding of such index; and (5) assess the long-term trends in frequency and severity of inland flooding and how shifts in climate, development, and erosion patterns might make certain regions vulnerable to more continual or escalating flood damage in the future.
Page 53 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
H.R. 2486 authorizes $6.05 million in appropriations to NOAA for carrying out this Act for FY 2003 through 2007. Of the total amounts authorized, $250,000 shall be available each year to institutes for higher learning to develop models that can improve the ability to forecast the coastal and estuary inland flooding that is influenced by tropical cyclones. In addition, $100,000 shall be available from FY03 to FY05 for institutes of higher education to carry out the activities described in (5) above.
H.R. 2486 requires NOAA to report to the House Science and Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committees: (1) annually through FY 2007 on its activities under this Act and the success and acceptance of the new inland flood warning index by public and emergency management professionals; and (2) by January 1, 2006, on the likely long-term trends in inland flooding, the results of which shall be used in the outreach activities, especially to alert the public and builders to flood hazards.
Legislative History
Representative Robert Etheridge introduced H.R. 2486 on July 12, 2001. On October 11, 2001, the Environment, Technology, and Standards Subcommittee held a hearing on the legislation. On December 12, 2001, the Subcommittee met to consider H.R. 2486. Subcommittee Chairman Vernon Ehlers offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute, which was adopted by a voice vote. The amendment: (1) designated NOAA, acting through the U.S. Weather Research Program, as the entity designed to carry out the activities associated with creating a new inland flood index, rather than the National Weather Service; (2) deleted references to tropical cyclones to broaden the scope of the new flood index to include all inland flooding, not just that caused by tropical cyclones; and (3) changed the date associated with the legislation from fiscal years 2002 through 2006 to fiscal years 2003 through 2007 to reflect the end of the fiscal year 2002 appropriations process for the Department of Commerce. The Subcommittee favorably reported the bill, H.R. 2486, as amended, by a voice vote.
Page 54 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
On May 22, 2002, the Committee on Science considered H.R. 2486. No amendments were offered and the Committee favorably reported the bill, as amended by the subcommittee, by a voice vote in H.Rept. 107–495.
On July 11, 2002, H.R. 2486 was considered by the House. During consideration Representative Sheila Jackson Lee offered an amendment to authorize $100,000 for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to conduct a three-year study to assess the long-term trends in frequency and severity of inland flooding and to determine how shifts in climate and other factors might make certain regions vulnerable to escalating flood damage in the future. The amendment was agreed to by voice vote. The measure was then considered and passed by: Y–413, N–3 (Roll Call No. 294).
H.R. 2486 was received in the Senate on July 12, 2002, and was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. On September 19, 2002, in an executive session, the bill was ordered to be reported without amendment to the Senate by voice vote. On October 10, the Committee filed S.Rept. 107–310. On October 16, 2002, the measure was considered by the Senate without amendment and was passed by unanimous consent. H.R. 2486 was signed by the President on October 29, 2002 and it became P.L. 107–253.
1.8—P.L. 107–277, Enterprise Integration Act of 2002 (H.R. 2733)
Background and Summary of Legislation
Enterprise integration—the ability to seamlessly exchange information up and down the supply chain of an industry without error or loss—can increase efficiency in every business along the supply chain, from the largest manufacture to the smallest supplier. It can also provide significant economic benefits for industries that are fully integrated.
Page 55 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
For example, with a fully integrated supply chain, if Ford were to change a design for a bumper, every one of the suppliers that contributes parts to Ford for that bumper would be able quickly and easily to see how the new specifications would affect its component. Each supplier would be able to redesign the component knowing that information does not have errors or was lost along the way. This integration will help large and small businesses improve efficiency by reducing costs and design cycles times.
Achieving this level of integration, however, is complex and requires a substantial amount of research regarding what information exchange standards need to be developed and implemented for different supply chains. The purpose of H.R. 2733, the Enterprise Integration Act of 2002 is to capitalize on the existing knowledge of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in this field by authorizing the agency to work with major manufacturing sectors (such as automotive, aerospace, electronics, shipbuilding, etc.) to (1) reach a consensus on what standards are needed to integrate supply chains, (2) support the development of those standards, and (3) help smaller businesses in those industries integrate. Specifically, the legislation authorizes NIST to:
Work with major manufacturing industries to identify current enterprise integration standardization and implementation activities within the United States and abroad, and assess the current state of these activities within any given industry;
Work with individual industries to develop roadmaps that will outline goals and milestones aimed toward fully integrating the industry's supply chains;
Page 56 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Support the develop, testing, promulgation, integration, adoption, and upgrading of standards related to enterprise integration efforts; and
Provide technical assistance to small and medium-sized business carrying out enterprise integration efforts.
The legislation gives NIST a four-year authorization for this program starting with $2,000,000 in Fiscal Year 2002, $10,000,000 in Fiscal Year 2003, $15,000,000 in Fiscal Year 2004, and $20,000,000 in Fiscal Year 2005.
Legislative History
On August 2, 2001, Ranking Minority Member James Barcia and Chairman Vernon Ehlers of the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards, introduced H.R. 2733. The bill was referred to the Committee on Science and its Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards. The Subcommittee marked up the bill on December 12, 2001 and ordered the bill reported, as amended, to the Committee by a voice vote. H.R. 2733 was then ordered reported, as amended, by the Committee on Science on May 22, 2002.
The Committee on Science filed H.Rept. 107–520 on June 20, 2002.
H.R. 2733 passed the House by a vote of 397–22 (Roll Call No. 293) on July 11, 2002. It was received in the Senate and referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Technology. The Committee met in Executive Session on September 19, 2002, and ordered the bill reported, without amendment, and filed S.Rept. 107–319.
Page 57 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
On October 17, 2002, H.R. 2733 passed the Senate without amendment by unanimous consent and was cleared for the White House. The President signed H.R. 2733 on November 5, 2002, which became P.L. 107–277.
1.9—P.L. 107–296, Homeland Security Act of 2002 (H.R. 5005)
Background and Summary of Legislation
The tragic events of September 11, 2001, and the Congressional oversight that followed, brought home the need to improve the coordination of federal counter-terrorism prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery efforts. President George Bush proposed the establishment of a new Department of Homeland Security that would consolidate under one organization many of the disparate agencies responsible for these efforts. H.R. 5005 authorizes the establishment of the new Department.
Summary of Science Committee Provisions
Section 2.
Contains definitions for the terms ''appropriate congressional committee,'' ''critical infrastructure,'' and ''key resources.''
TITLE I—Department of Homeland Security
Page 58 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 102(f).
Requires the Secretary to appoint a Special Assistant to the Secretary with various responsibilities, including working with federal laboratories, federally funded research and development centers, universities and other entities to produce and deploy the best available technologies for homeland security missions and to assist in the development and promotion of private sector best practices to secure critical infrastructure.
Section 102(g).
Clarifies that all standards activities of the Department are to be conducted in accordance with the National Technology Transfer Advancement Act of 1995 and OMB Circular A–119.
Section 103(a).
Authorizes the appointment by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, of various officers including an Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection and an Under Secretary for Science and Technology.
TITLE II—Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection
Section 201.
Authorizes the appointment of an Assistant Secretary for Infrastructure Protection and requires the development of a comprehensive national plan for securing key resources and critical infrastructure, including information technology and telecommunications systems (including satellites).
Page 59 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 202(g).
Transfers the functions, personnel, assets, and liabilities of various agencies to the Department of Homeland Security but does not permit the transfer of the Computer Security Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology as originally proposed by the Administration.
Section 223.
Authorizes the Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection to provide state and local governments and private entities that own or operate critical information systems with threat and vulnerability assessments and warnings, crisis management support, and technical assistance with respect to emergency recovery plans.
Section 224.
Authorizes the Under Secretary to establish a national technology guard, to be known as ''NET Guard,'' comprised of local teams of volunteers with expertise in relevant areas of science and technology, to assist local communities to respond and recover from attacks on information systems and communications networks.
Section 231.
Establishes within the Department of Justice an Office of Science and Technology Policy to carry out research, development, testing, evaluation, and cost-benefit analysis in fields that would improve the safety, effectiveness, and efficiency of law enforcement technologies, to support research fellowships, to establish and maintain performance standards in accordance with the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 and to establish and maintain programs to certify and validate products that conform with such standards and to serve on the Technical Support Working Group of the Department of Defense.
Page 60 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 235.
Authorizes the operation, through a merit-based, competitive process, of National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Centers to support research and development, technology transfer and implementation, and the development and dissemination of guidelines and technological standards for law enforcement technologies.
TITLE III—Science and Technology in Support of Homeland Security
Section 301.
Authorizes the establishment of a Directorate of Science and Technology headed by an Under Secretary for Science and Technology.
Section 302.
Authorizes the Under Secretary to:
serve as the principal advisor to the Secretary on research and development efforts;
develop a national policy and strategic plan for identifying priorities, goals, objectives and policies for, and coordinating the Federal Government's civilian efforts to identify and develop countermeasures to chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and other emerging terrorist threats;
Page 61 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
support the Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection, by assessing and testing homeland security vulnerabilities and threats;
conduct intramural and extramural basic and applied research, development, demonstration, testing, and evaluation activities that are relevant to any or all elements of the Department;
establish priorities for directing, funding, and conducting research, development, test and evaluation, and procurement of technology and systems for preventing the importation of weapons of mass destruction and detecting, preventing, protecting against, and responding to terrorist attacks;
establish a system for transferring homeland security developments or technologies to Federal, State, and local governments and private sector entities;
enter into work agreements, joint sponsorships, contracts, or other agreements with the Department of Energy regarding the use of the national laboratories;
collaborate with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Attorney General regarding the inclusion of biological agents and toxins on the ''select agents'' list;
support U.S. leadership in science and technology;
establish and administer the primary research and development activities of the Department;
Page 62 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
coordinate and integrate all research, development, demonstration, testing, and evaluation activities of the Department;
coordinate with other appropriate executive agencies in developing, carrying out and disseminating the science and technology agenda of the Department;
develop and oversee the administration of guidelines for merit review of research and development projects throughout the Department, and for the dissemination of research conducted by the Department.
Section 303.
Authorizes the transfer to the Department of the functions, personnel, assets, and liabilities of the following entities:
the chemical and biological national security and supporting programs and activities of the nonproliferation and verification research and development programs of the Department of Energy (excluding programs related to the strategic nuclear defense posture of the U.S.);
the nuclear smuggling programs and activities within the proliferation detection program of the nonproliferation and research verification program;
the nuclear assessment program and activities of the assessment, detection and verification research and development program of the international materials protection and cooperation program;
Page 63 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
life sciences activities of the biological and environmental research program related to microbial pathogens that are designated by the President for transfer;
the Environmental Measurements Laboratory;
the advanced scientific computing research program and activities at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory;
the National Bio-Weapons Defense Analysis Center of the Department of Defense.
Section 304.
Authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in collaboration with the Secretary of Homeland Security, to set priorities, goals, objectives and policies for civilian human health related research and development activities for chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and other emerging threats carried out by the Department of Health and Human Services. The section adds a new provision to the Public Health Service Act related to the administration of smallpox countermeasures by health professionals.
Section 305.
Authorizes the Secretary to establish or contract with one or more federally funded research and development centers to provide independent analysis of homeland security issues.
Page 64 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 306.
Requires that to the greatest extent practicable, research conducted or supported by the Department shall be unclassified, clarifies that other Under Secretaries of Homeland Security may carry out research, development, demonstration, and deployment activities so long as they are coordinated through the Under Secretary for Science and Technology, authorizes the Secretary to issue necessary regulations with respect to research, development, demonstration, testing, and evaluation activities of the Department, and requires the President to notify Congress prior to effecting any transfer of Department of Energy life sciences activities.
Section 307.
Authorizes the Secretary to establish a Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency to award competitive, merit-reviewed grants, cooperative agreements or contracts to public or private entities to:
support basic and applied homeland security research to promote revolutionary changes in technologies that would promote homeland security;
advance the development, testing, evaluation and deployment of critical homeland security technologies; and
accelerate the prototyping and deployment of technologies that would address homeland security vulnerabilities.
Page 65 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 308.
Authorizes the Secretary to conduct both extramural and intramural research programs, establish university-based centers for homeland security, and draw upon the expertise of any laboratory of the Federal Government.
Section 309.
Authorizes the Secretary to utilize the Department of Energy national laboratories and sites to carry out the missions of the Department and requires that any research, development, test, and evaluation activities conducted within the Department of Energy that are directly or indirectly related to homeland security are fully coordinated with the Secretary of Homeland Security.
Section 310.
Transfers the Plum Island Animal Disease Center of the Department of Agriculture to the Department of Homeland Security.
Section 311.
Establishes a Homeland Security Science and Technology Advisory Committee to advise the Under Secretary of Science and Technology and to identify research areas of potential importance to the security of the Nation.
Page 66 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 312.
Establishes a federally funded research and development center to be known as the Homeland Security Institute to:
provide systems analysis, risk analysis, and simulation and modeling to determine the vulnerabilities of the Nation's critical infrastructures;
conduct economic and policy analysis to assess the distributed costs and benefits of alternative approaches to enhancing security;
evaluate the effectiveness of measures deployed to enhance the security of institutions, facilities, and infrastructure;
identify instances when common standards and protocols could improve the inter-operability and effective utilization of tools developed for field operators and first responders;
assist federal agencies and departments in establishing test beds to evaluate the effectiveness of technologies under development and to assess the appropriateness of such technologies for deployment;
design and apply metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of homeland security programs, throughout the Federal Government;
Page 67 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
design and support the conduct of homeland security-related exercises and simulations; or
create strategic technology development plans to reduce vulnerabilities in the Nation's critical infrastructures.
Section 313.
Establishes a technology clearinghouse to encourage and support innovative ways to enhance homeland security.
TITLE IV—Directorate of Border and Transportation Security
Section 428(h).
Requires the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to submit to Congress a report on how the visa issuance provisions of H.R. 5005 will affect procedures for the issuance of student visas.
TITLE V—Emergency Preparedness and Response
Section 403.
Transfers the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the Integrated Hazard Information System of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to the Department of Homeland Security.
Page 68 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 507.
Describes the functions of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
TITLE VIII—Coordination with Non-Federal Entities; Inspector General; United States Secret Service; Coast Guard; General Provisions
Section 831.
Authorizes the Secretary to carry out a pilot program under which the Secretary may utilize ''other transactions'' authority when carrying out basic, applied, and advanced research and development projects when a determination is made that a contract, grant, or cooperative agreement is not feasible or appropriate. The Secretary is also authorized to utilize special authorities when carrying out prototype projects.
TITLE X—Information Security
Section 1001.
Authorizes the Director of OMB to oversee agency information security policies and practices, by:
promulgating information security standards;
Page 69 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
overseeing the implementation of policies, principles, standards and guidelines on information security;
coordinating the development of standards and guidelines under section 20 of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act;
overseeing agency compliance with the policies, standards and guidelines.
Each agency shall report annually to the Director of OMB and the Committees on Government Reform and Science of the House of Representatives on the adequacy and effectiveness of information security policies, procedures, and practices, and compliance with the requirements of this title.
Section 1003.
Amends the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act to state that the Institute shall:
have the mission of developing standards, guidelines, and associated methods and techniques for information systems;
develop standards and guidelines, including minimum requirements, for information systems used or operated by an agency or by a contractor of an agency, other than national security systems; and
Page 70 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
develop standards and guidelines, including minimum requirements, for providing adequate information security for all agency operations and assets, other than national security systems.
Section 1004.
Renames the Computer System Security and Privacy Advisory Board the Information Security and Privacy Advisory Board and adding to its responsibilities the responsibility to advise the Institute and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget on information security and privacy issues pertaining to Federal Government information systems.
Section 1006.
Clarifies that nothing in this Act affects the authority of the National Institute of Standards and Technology or the Department of Commerce relating to the development and promulgation of standards and guidelines.
TITLE XVII—Conforming and Technical Amendments
Section 1712.
Authorizes the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to advise the President on scientific and technical considerations pertaining to homeland security and to work in close cooperation and consultation with the Office of Homeland Security.
Section 1713.
Page 71 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Amends the National Oceanographic Partnership Program to include the Under Secretary for Science and Technology of the Department of Homeland Security.
Legislative History
Representative Dick Armey, Chairman of the House Select Committee on Homeland Security introduced H.R. 5005 on June 24, 2002. On July 12, 2002 the recommendations of the House Committee on Science were transmitted to the Select Committee on Homeland Security and the Committee on Science was discharged from further consideration of the legislation. On July 24, 2002 the bill was reported (as amended) by the Select Committee on Homeland Security and on July 26, 2002 the bill passed the House of Representatives by a vote of Y–295, N–132 (Roll Call No. 367). The Senate approved the legislation with an amendment on November 19, 2002. H.R. 5005 was signed by the President on November 25, 2002 and became P.L. 207–296.
1.10—P.L. 107–299, National Sea Grant College Program Act Amendments of 2002 (H.R. 3389)
Background and Summary of Legislation
The National Sea Grant College Program (Sea Grant) was established by the National Sea Grant College Act (33 U.S.C. 1121–1131), which Congress passed in 1966. Sea Grant was designed as the marine counterpart of the agriculture research and extension activities based at the country's land grant universities. Sea Grant's objective is to increase the understanding, assessment, development, utilization and conservation of the Nation's ocean, coastal and Great Lakes resources. Sea Grant was originally housed at the National Science Foundation (NSF), but was transferred to the newly created National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the Department of Commerce in 1970. Sea Grant is made up of 30 sea Grant College programs located in coastal and Great Lakes states and Puerto Rico that use the resources of more than 300 U.S. universities and scientific institutions to conduct marine research, education and outreach activities.
Page 72 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Each Sea Grant state program works with the National Sea Grant office and the user community of the state to develop a list of priority research areas to promote the sustainable use and overall well-being of marine resources. Each program designs its own education programs to train future marine scientists and technicians at the graduate level as well as elementary and secondary students and teachers. Each program also develops its own Sea Grant extension service, tailored to provide information and technical assistance to meet the needs of the user community of the state.
For FY 2001, $62 million in federal funds was appropriated for Sea Grant. According to the National Sea Grant Office, about 80 percent went directly to the state programs, and 15 percent went to national strategic initiatives through nationwide, competitive grants. By law no more than five percent can go for national administration of the program. The state programs contributed about another $35 million in matching and in-kind contributions. Sea Grant also managed an additional $16 million that was transferred from other NOAA programs, bringing the total amount to about $113 million.
Of the $113 million, about $63 million or 56 percent was spent on research activities. The remaining 44 percent was used for extension, communication, education and management functions.
Congress last passed a Sea Grant authorization in 1998, which runs through fiscal year 2003. The legislation focused on implementing the recommendations of a 1994 National Research Council (NRC) review of the program, including those to better define the roles of the National Sea Grant Office, Sea Grant College programs and the Sea Grant Review Panel. The NRC panel also recommended streamlining the process for reviewing proposals and evaluating the program, which was accomplished through the legislation and administrative reforms.
Page 73 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
The authorization for the Sea Grant program expires at the end of fiscal year 2003. In addition, the Administration's fiscal year 2003 Budget Request proposes to transfer the Sea Grant program from NOAA to the National Science Foundation (NSF) to promote more rigorous, merit-based competition among researchers.
H.R. 3389 reauthorizes Sea Grant within the NOAA for five years, increases authorization levels, and promotes competition between the state programs for additional resources through a strengthened merit-reviewed process.
Section 2—Amendments to Findings
Inserts language to encourage strong collaborations between Administration scientists and academic institutions.
Section 3—Requirements Applicable to National Sea Grant Program
Requires the Secretary of Commerce to develop, at least every four years, a strategic plan that establishes priorities for the National Sea Grant College Program.
Inserts language to: (1) evaluate the performance of sea grant colleges to determine which are the best managed and carry out the highest quality research, education, extension, and training activities; and (2) rate the programs according to their relative performance into no less than five categories, with each of the two best-performing categories containing no more than 25 percent of the programs.
Page 74 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Requires the Secretary of Commerce, three years after the date of enactment, to contract with the National Academy of Sciences to: (1) review the effectiveness of the evaluation and rating system; (2) determine whether the state programs have improved as a result of the evaluation process; and (3) make appropriate recommendations to improve the overall effectiveness of the evaluation process. The Academy shall submit a report to Congress on its finding no later than four years after the date of enactment of the Act.
Inserts language that the Director of the National Sea Grant College Program shall encourage and promote coordination and cooperation between the research, education, and outreach programs of the Administration and those academic institutions.
Section 5—Fellowships
Inserts language that the Secretary shall strive to ensure equal access for minority and economically disadvantaged students to the program carried out under this subsection. In addition, not later than one year after the date of enactment and every two years thereafter, the Secretary of Commerce shall submit a report to Congress describing the efforts by the Secretary to ensure equal access for minority and economically disadvantaged students.
Repeals reference to postdoctoral fellows.
Section 6—Terms of Membership for Sea Grant Review Panel
Inserts language that the term of office for a voting member of the panel shall be three years for a member appointed before the date of enactment of this legislation, and four years for a member appointed after the date of enactment of this legislation.
Page 75 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 7—Authorization of Appropriations
Inserts language for authorization of: $60 million for FY 2003; $75 million for FY 2004; $77.5 million for FY 2005; $80 million for FY 2006; $82.5 million for FY 2007; and $85 million for FY 2008. In addition to the amount authorized above, there is authorized for each fiscal years 2003 through 2008, $5 million each for research into zebra mussels, oysters, and harmful algal blooms. Also, it provides $3 million each year for competitive grants for fishery extension activities.
The National Sea Grant College Program Office may use no more than five percent of the total funds authorized for administration of the program. In addition, none of the money appropriated for the zebra mussels, oysters, harmful algal blooms, or fisheries extension may be used by the National Office for administration expenses.
Adds a section that in any fiscal year in which appropriations exceed the amounts appropriated for fiscal year 2003, the Secretary shall distribute any excess amounts (except amounts used for administration of programs) to any combination of the following: state sea grant programs according to their ratings; national strategic initiatives; colleges or universities in the process of being designated a sea grant college program; or a new sea grant program designated after the date of enactment of the bill.
Section 8—Annual Report on Progress in Becoming Designated as Sea Grant Colleges and Sea Grant Institutes
Page 76 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Requires the Secretary of Commerce to report on efforts and progress made by college and universities to become sea grant colleges, and specifically those of territories and freely associated states. It shall also include the assistance provided by the Secretary for these activities and the additional actions and activities necessary for those entities to become designated a sea grant college program.
Section 9—Coordination
Requires the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere and the Director of the National Science Foundation to jointly submit a report to the House Committees on Resources and Science and the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee on how the oceans and coastal research activities of NOAA, including the Coastal Ocean Program and the National Sea Grant College Program, and the National Science Foundation will be coordinated. The report shall describe in detail any overlapping ocean and coastal research interests between the agencies and specify how the programs will pursue such research interests in a complementary manner.
Legislative History
Representative Wayne T. Gilchrest introduced H.R. 3389 on November 30, 2001. On February 28, 2002, the Environment, Technology, and Standards Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill.
On March 7, 2002, the bill was referred to the Committee on Science after being reported by the Committee on Resources. The Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards met on March 14, 2002 to consider the bill. Subcommittee Chairman Vernon Ehlers offered an en bloc amendment, which was adopted by voice vote. The amendment: (1) required that Sea Grant coordinate with the National Science Foundation; (2) struck any provision relating to moving the Coastal Ocean Program from NOAA's National Ocean Service to Sea Grant; (3) struck the provision granting direct financial assistance to the Pacific Islands Regional Consortium; and (4) required that any funding above the FY02 levels be allocated to state programs by a merit-reviewed, competitive process or to individual projects competed nationally. The Subcommittee favorably reported the bill, H.R. 3389, as amended, by a voice vote.
Page 77 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
On March 20, 2002, the Committee on Science considered H.R. 3389. Representative Ehlers offered an en bloc amendment that included two provisions: 1) an amendment by Representative Sheila Jackson Lee requiring the Secretary to 'strive to ensure equal access for minority and economically disadvantaged students;' and 2) an amendment to clarify that education, extension, and training programs would be part of the merit review process. The Committee adopted the amendment by voice vote. The Committee then favorably reported the bill as amended, by voice vote, and authorized staff to make technical and conforming changes as necessary.
The Committee on Science filed H.Rept. 369, Pt. 2 on April 15, 2002.
On June 19, 2002, the House considered the measure. Representative Gilcrest offered a manager's amendment in the nature of a substitute. This amendment included an agreement negotiated between the Resources and Science Committees. The amendment included provisions outlined above passed by the House Science Committee and included provisions for a study on institutions that want to become sea grant programs, especially the Pacific Islands Regional Consortium, and for the National Sea Grant Office to provide Congress with a strategic plan every four years. H.R. 3389 passed the House, as amended, by a vote of 407–2 (Roll Call No. 237).
S. 2428, the Senate companion to H.R. 3389 as passed by the House Science Committee on March 20, 2002, was introduced by Sentor John Kerry on April 30, 2002. On June 27, 2002, the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation passed S. 2428 without amendment. Negotiations between the Senate and the House Resources and Science Committees produced an amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 3389.
Page 78 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
The final amendment was very similar to the version passed by the House on June 19, 2002. The minor changes includes language specifying that Sea Grant programs should be evaluated to determine which are the best, and rate them into no less than five categories, with each of the two best-performing categories containing no more than 25 percent of the programs. The amendment instructs NOAA to contract with the National Academy of Sciences to review the effectiveness of the evaluation process.
The amendment in the nature of a substitute to H.R. 3389 passed the Senate on October 11, 2002 by unanimous consent. In the House, the motion to reconsider H.R. 3389, as amended by the Senate, was agreed to by a voice vote on November 12, 2002 and sent to the President. The President signed H.R. 3389 on November 26, 2002, which became P.L. 107–299.
1.11—P.L. 107–303, Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002 (H.R. 1070)
Background and Summary of Legislation
Over the past 200 years, the Great Lakes region has undergone significant industrialization. Some of the heavy industries include mining, steel, machine tools, and automobile manufacturing. Agriculture also is a significant component of the regional economy.
This development has had a significant impact on the Great Lakes ecosystem as contaminants discharged from various sources have made their way into the waters, then into the sediments, and ultimately into the food chain. The Great Lakes are particularly vulnerable to contamination because the average outflow rates from most of the Lakes are very slow. Lake Superior retains water for 173 years. Lake Michigan for 62 years, Lake Huron for 31 years. Lake Ontario has a water retention period of 6 years and Lake Erie, the shallowest of the Lakes, has the shortest water retention period, at 2.7 years. Lakes with low outflow rates do not flush contaminants quickly. As a result, many pollutants discharged into the Great Lakes settle into the sediments at the bottom of the Lakes.
Page 79 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
According to the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) National Water Quality Inventory 1998 Report to Congress (based on state surveys of 90 percent of Great Lakes shoreline miles) most of the Great Lakes are safe for swimming and other recreational activities and can be used as a source of drinking water. However, only four percent of the near-shore waters fully support all of their designated uses. Water quality impairments in the Great Lakes generally involve fish consumption advisories and aquatic life impacts. According to EPA's 2001 National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories, 100 percent of the Great Lakes and their connecting waters are under fish consumption advisories for persistent toxic substances. Exposure to these toxic substances, which include polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dioxins, and mercury, may pose a significant risk to human health, mainly through the consumption of contaminated fish. States report that the primary sources of pollutants causing these impairments are atmospheric deposition and contaminated sediment. Other sources include land disposal of wastes, agricultural sources, industrial and municipal point sources, and storm water and other urban runoff.
In 1972, the United States and Canada signed the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement to address mutual interests and improve water quality in Great Lakes. In 1987, the two nations revised the agreement and committed to ecosystem cleanup plans for 'Areas of Concern.'
In May 2002, the General Accounting Office (GAO) released a report on the status of implementation of Remedial Action Plans for the Great Lakes' Areas of Concern. This report concluded that the EPA is not effectively fulfilling the Nation's responsibility for developing and implementing the Remedial Action Plans required under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. The report criticized the Agency for transferring oversight responsibility for Remedial Action Plans from the Great Lakes National Program Office to EPA's regional offices in 1992, noting that the regional offices provided initial support and oversight for the Remedial Action Plan process, but then significantly reduced the number of staff and the amount of federally allocated funds devoted to Remedial Action Plan development and implementation. The GAO report recommends that the EPA Administrator clarify which office within EPA is directly responsible for ensuring implementation of the Remedial Action Plans and identify the actions, time periods, and resources needed to help EPA to fulfill its responsibilities.
Page 80 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
According to a 1997 document from the IJC 'Overcoming Obstacles to Sediment Remediation,' the primary obstacles to sediment remediation at Great Lakes Areas of Concern fall into six categories: (1) limited funding and resources, (2) regulatory complexity, (3) lack of a decision-making framework, (4) limited corporate involvement, (5) insufficient research and technology development, and (6) limited public and local support.
To help address these barriers, H.R. 1070, the Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002 authorizes $50 million a year for five years for EPA to conduct, with local cost-sharing partners, monitoring, source control and remediation of sediment contamination in Great Lakes Areas of Concern.
Providing federal support for remediation of Areas of Concern may result in greater cooperation and can leverage contributions by local communities and the private sector. For example, at the Ashtabula River Area of Concern the participation of the Army Corps of Engineers helped to leverage participation by other public and private entities in remediation efforts at that site.
H.R. 1070 supports research on managing contaminated sediments by authorizing $2 million for each of the fiscal years 2003 through 2007 to conduct research and development on the use of innovative approaches, technologies, and techniques for the remediation of sediment contamination in Areas of Concerns.
Finally, H.R. 1070 addresses several of the concerns raised by the General Accounting Office by reemphasizing the role of the Great Lakes National Program Office in implementing the Remedial Action Plans in Areas of Concern, and by authorizing additional federal resources for the Great Lakes National Program Office to address sediment contamination in the Areas of Concern.
Page 81 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
Representatives Vernon Ehlers, Mark Kirk, and James Barcia introduced H.R. 1070 on March 15, 2001. The bill was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure with subsequent referral to the Committee on Science.
Senator Carl Levin and Senator Mike DeWine introduced S. 2544, the Senate version of the Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002, on May 22, 2002. It was referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
The Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment held a hearing on H.R. 1070 on July 11, 2001. On June 25, 2002, the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment marked up H.R. 1070, and reported the bill favorably to the Committee by voice vote, with an amendment.
The amendment adopted by the Subcommittee changed the authorization from a grant program to a program that places responsibility to carry out qualified projects with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, with cost-sharing support from a non-federal sponsor. The amendment also made technical changes to the definition of a qualified project.
The Transportation and Infrastructure Committee met in open session on June 26, 2002, and ordered the bill, as amended, reported to the House by voice vote.
The Science Committee referred the bill to the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology and Standards on March 21, 2001. The Committee discharged the measure on July 18, 2002. On September 4, 2002, the House agreed to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 1070, as amended, by a voice vote.
Page 82 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
On September 5, H.R. 1070 was received in the Senate, where it was referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Senators James Jeffords, Patrick Leahy, Hillary Clinton, and Charles Schumer introduced S. 2928, the Daniel Patrick Moynihan Lake Champlain Basin Program Act of 2002 on September 12, 2002. It was referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. The Committee met to consider S. 2928 on September 26, 2002. A manager's amendment offered by Senator Jeffords was agreed to by voice vote. The amended text of S. 2928 was included as title II of the manager's amendment to H.R. 1070. The measure was order reported by voice vote at the Committee markup on September 26, 2002.
H.R. 1070 passed the Senate, as amended, by unanimous consent on October 17, 2002. On November 12, 2002, the House agreed to suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment to H.R. 1070 by a voice vote, clearing the measure for the President. The President signed H.R. 1070 on November 27, 2002 which became P.L. 107–303.
1.12—P.L. 107–305, Cyber Security Research and Development Act (H.R. 3394)
Background and Summary of Legislation
The United States has become extraordinarily vulnerable to cyber attacks by terrorists because an increasing number of critical aspects of daily life rely on computer systems and networks (e.g., water systems and electricity grids). Currently available technologies provide inadequate protection, yet relatively little R&D is being conducted to develop new approaches to protecting computer systems and networks.
Page 83 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
This directly follows from the fact that the private sector has had little incentive to invest in cyber security because the market emphasizes only speed and convenience. Yet the Federal Government has not filled the gap and has chronically under-invested in cyber security, due, in part, to the fact that no federal agency has the responsibility of ensuring that the Nation has a robust cyber security research enterprise.
As a result, what little research has been done on cyber security has been incremental, leaving the basic approaches to cyber security unchanged for decades. Moreover, as a field with relatively little money, few researchers and minimal attention, cyber security fails to attract the interest of students, perpetuating the problems in the field.
H.R. 3394 addresses these problems by authorizing appropriations to the National Science Foundation (NSF) and to the Secretary of Commerce for the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to establish new programs, and to increase funding for certain current programs, for Computer and Network Security (CNS) research and development and CNS research fellowships.
Section 4—National Science Foundation Research
Requires the NSF Director to award grants for CNS through: (1) basic research in innovative approaches to the structure of hardware and software; and (2) multidisciplinary research centers of institutions of higher education (IHEs) or consortia thereof which may partner with government laboratories or for-profit institutions.
Page 84 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 5—National Science Foundation Computer and Network Security Programs
Requires the NSF Director to establish programs of grants to IHEs for: (1) capacity-building of undergraduate and Master's degree programs in CNS; (2) graduate traineeships in CNS research; and (3) CNS faculty development traineeship programs to enable graduate students to pursue academic careers in cyber security upon completion of doctoral degrees. Requires the Secretary to provide certain education-related grants under the Scientific and Advanced Technology Act of 1992, but authorizes funds only to support activities to improve education in CNS-related fields. Requires that CNS be included among the fields of specialization supported by NSF's Graduate Research Fellowships program under the National Science Foundation Act of 1950.
Section 7—Consulation
Amends the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 to require the NSF to take a leading role in supporting research and education activities to improve networked information systems' security.
Section 8—National Institute of Standards and Technology Programs
Amends the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act (NISTA) to require the NIST Director, through the Director of the Office for Information Security Programs, to establish a program of assistance to IHEs that enter into partnerships with for-profit entities to support research to improve CNS. Authorizes the NIST Director to establish a program to award post-doctoral research fellowships, including senior fellowships, to individuals seeking research positions at institutions engaged in research activities related to CNS. Provides for periodic program review, as well as a comprehensive review after five program years.
Page 85 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Requires the NIST Director to develop CNS checklists for Federal Government computer hardware or software systems.
Section 9—Computer Security Review, Public Meetings, and Information
Amends NISTA to authorize appropriations to enable the Computer System Security and Privacy Advisory Board to: (1) identify emerging issues related to computer security, privacy, and cryptography; (2) convene public meetings, and (3) publish and disseminate information.
Section 10—Intramural Security Research
Requires NIST to carry out specified types of intramural computer security research.
Section 11—Authorization of Appropriations
Authorizes appropriations to the Secretary of Commerce for NIST for: (1) the CNS research program; and (2) intramural computer security research.
Section 12—National Academy of Sciences Study on Computer and Network Security in Critical Infrastructures
Requires the NIST Director to arrange with the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences to study and report to specified congressional committees on vulnerabilities of the Nation's network infrastructure and recommendations for improvements.
Page 86 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 13—Coordination of Federal Cyber Security Research and Development
Requires the NSF and NIST Directors to: (1) coordinate the research programs under this Act; and (2) work with the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to ensure that programs under this Act are taken into account in any government-wide cyber security research effort.
Section 16—Grant Eligibility Requirements and Compliance with Immigration Law
Prohibits the award of grants or fellowships under this Act to: (1) individuals who are in violation of their status as non-immigrants under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA); (2) individuals who are aliens from a country that is a state sponsor of terrorism, under the Enhanced Border Security and VISA Entry Reform Act (EBSVERA); or (3) institutions that have materially failed to comply with recordkeeping and reporting requirements to receive non-immigrant students or exchange visitor program participants under INA or the Illegal Immigration Reform and Responsibility Act of 1996, or have been suspended or terminated under EBSVERA.
Section 17—Report on Grant and Fellowship Programs
Requires a report to Congress reviewing this Act to ensure that grants and fellowships are being awarded to individuals and institutions in compliance with INA in order to protect our national security.
Page 87 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert introduced H.R. 3394 on December 4, 2001 and it was referred to the Committee on Science and the Committee on Education and the Workforce. The Committee reported H.R. 3394, as amended, on December 6, 2002 and filed H.Rept. 107–355, Pt. 1 on February 4, 2002. By recorded vote, the bill passed the House on February 7, 2002: Y–400, N–12 (Roll Call No. 13).
The bill was received in the Senate on February 7, 2002. On October 16, 2002, the Senate struck all after the enacting clause and substituted the language of S. 2182. The amended measure then passed by unanimous consent.
On November 12, 2002, the House agreed to suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment by a voice vote. The bill was signed by the President on November 27, 2002 and became P.L. 107–305.
1.13—P.L. 107–314, National Defense Authorization Act of 2003 (H.R. 4546)
Background and Summary of Legislation
On July 25, 2002, the Speaker appointed Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert, Subcommittee on Research Chairman Nick Smith, and Science Committee Ranking Minority Member Ralph Hall as additional conferees to H.R. 4546, Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, for consideration of Sections 244, 246, 1216, 3155, and 3163.
Page 88 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
These conference committee deliberations, contained in H.Rept. 107–772 (Conference Report to accompany H.R. 4546), resulted in the enactment of Sections 245, 247, 1207, and 3155 of the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 (P.L. 107–314), which was signed into law by the President on December 2, 2002. Descriptions of these provisions follow.
Section 245—Vehicle Fuel Cell Program
The Senate amendment contained a provision (Section 244) that would require the Secretary of Defense to carry out a cost-shared program to develop fuel cell technology for use in Department of Defense vehicles. The House bill contained no similar provision. The House receded with a clarifying amendment that would require the Secretary to carry out the program in coordination with the Department of Energy and other appropriate federal agencies.
Section 247—Activities and Assessment of the Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research
The Senate amendment contained a provision (Section 246) that would modify the Defense Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (DEPSCoR) and to require a National Research Council assessment of the program. The House bill contained no similar provision. The House receded with an amendment. The conferees directed the Secretary of Defense to continue to support the DEPSCoR effort to develop new defense research capabilities across the Nation. The conferees encouraged the Secretary to continue to support activities that will develop world-class researchers in DEPSCoR states and to work closely with the individual states' planning committees to ensure that the program supports the development of defense research infrastructure.
Page 89 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 1207—Monitoring of Implementation of 1979 Agreement Between the United States and China on Cooperation in Science and Technology
The Senate amendment included a provision (Section 1216) that would require the Office of Science and Technology, in cooperation with the Department of State, to monitor the implementation of the 1979 United States-China Agreement on Cooperation in Science and Technology (S&T) and its protocols. The amendment would require the Office of S&T Cooperation to submit a biennial report on the activities conducted under this agreement and the benefits of this agreement to the Chinese economy, military, and defense industrial base. The House bill contained no similar provision. The House recedes with an amendment that would authorize the President to establish a working group to monitor the Agreement and directs the Director of Central Intelligence, the Secretary of Defense, and the Inspector General of the Commerce Department to conduct various assessments that would be components of the biennial report. The conferees continue to support the numerous mutually beneficial exchanges that occur under the auspices of the Agreement.
Section 3155—Program on Research and Technology for Protection from Nuclear or Radiological Terrorism
The Senate amendment contained a provision (Section 3155) that would direct the Administrator of Nuclear Security to carry out a program of research and technology for protection from nuclear or radiological terrorism in support of homeland security and counter-terrorism. As part of the program, the Administrator would coordinate this program with the Office of Homeland Security, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Departments of Defense, State, and Commerce, and the International Atomic Energy Agency. In addition, the Administrator would cooperate with the Russian Federation on research and demonstration of these technologies and, where feasible, provide assistance to other countries on matters relating to nuclear or radiological terrorism. The amendment would also authorize the Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation in the National Nuclear Security Administration to use up to $15.0 million for the development of a new generation of radiation detectors for homeland defense under this program. The House bill contained no similar provision. The House receded with an amendment that would direct the Administrator to establish a cooperative program with the Russian Federation on the research, development, and demonstration of technologies for protection from and response to nuclear or radiological terrorism. The program would conduct research on technologies that could be used for the detection, identification, assessment, control, and disposition of radiological materials that could be used for nuclear terrorism. The program would also provide for the demonstration of the technologies developed by this program to other countries, in cooperation with the Russian Federation. The Administrator would be required to coordinate these research, development, and demonstration efforts with the Department of Energy's Office of Environment, Safety, and Health; the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; the Departments of State, Defense, and Commerce; and the International Atomic Energy Agency. The Administrator would be authorized to use up to $15.0 million to carry out the activities under this program.
Page 90 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 3163—Utilization of Department of Energy National Laboratories and Sites in Support of Counter-terrorism and Homeland Security Activities
Senate amendment contained a provision (Section 3163) that would authorize the Department of Energy (DOE) to enter into joint sponsorship agreements at DOE laboratories with state, local, or other federal agencies and establish the parameters under which the joint partnership agreements would operate. The House bill contained no similar provision. The Senate receded, and the provision was not adopted.
1.14—P.L. 107–355, Pipeline Infrastructure Protection to Enhance Security and Safety Act (H.R. 3609)
Background and Summary of Legislation
The purpose of the bill is to strengthen Federal pipeline safety programs to ensure greater protection of the public from the risk of pipeline accidents and spills and to improve the functioning of Federal, state and local pipeline safety programs. Provisions of the bill include a requirement for safety inspections of all U.S. oil and natural gas pipelines within 10 years, improved coordination of state one-call notification programs for reporting pipeline accidents, enhanced enforcement of pipeline safety regulations, greater worker and whistleblower protection measures, and expanded pipeline safety research, development and demonstration programs. Section 9 of the bill enacted into law incorporated provisions related to pipeline safety research, development and demonstration drawn from H.R. 3929, the Energy Pipeline Research, Development and Demonstration Act, introduced by Rep. Ralph Hall and referred to the Committee on Science, and in addition to the Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure and Energy and Commerce.
Page 91 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 9—Pipeline Safety Information Grants to Communities
Establishes a Federal research, development, demonstration, and standardization program to be formed by the heads of the Department of Energy, the Department of Transportation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (the ''participating agencies'') to ensure the integrity of ''energy pipelines'' and ''next-generation pipelines.'' Defines ''energy pipeline'' as a pipeline system used in the transmission or local distribution of natural gas, crude oil, or refined petroleum products. Defines ''next-generation pipelines'' as a transmission or local distribution pipeline system for transmitting energy or energy-related products, in liquid or gaseous form, other than energy pipelines. Authorizes appropriations.
Legislative History
On February 1, 2001, comprehensive pipeline safety legislation (S. 235) was introduced in the Senate by Senator John McCain. On February 8, 2001, the measure was considered in Senate and passed by a vote of 98–0. Although numerous bills were introduced in the House, there was no further legislative action on the Senate bill. During Senate floor consideration of comprehensive energy legislation, the Senate added a subtitle incorporating pipeline safety legislation as part of the Senate amendment to H.R. 4, the Energy Policy Act of 2002, (Title VII, Subtitle C—Pipeline Safety). The Senate Amendment to H.R. 4 passed the Senate on April 25, 2002. On June 12, 2002, the Speaker appointed conferees from the Committee on Science for the consideration of inter alia, section 770–772 of the Senate Amendment, relating to pipeline safety RD&D.
Page 92 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
A companion House bill (H.R. 3609), the Pipeline Infrastructure Protection to Enhance Security and Safety Act, was introduced by Representatives Don Young and W.J. (Billy) Tauzin on December 20, 2001 and referred jointly to the Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure and Energy and Commerce. On March 12, 2002, Science Committee Ranking Minority Member Ralph Hall introduced H.R. 3929, the Pipeline Safety Research, Development and Demonstration Act, which was referred to the Committee on Science, and in addition to the Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure and Energy and Commerce. During committee consideration of H.R. 3609 by both committees of primary jurisdiction over the pipeline safety program, the provisions of H.R. 3929, were incorporated by amendments offered in the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee by Representative Jerry Costello and in the Energy and Commerce Committee by Representative Hall.
On July 23, 2002, the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and Commerce both reported H.R. 3609 (H.Rept. 107–605, Part I for the Committee on Transportation, H.Rept. 107–605, Part II for the Committee on Energy and Commerce). H.R. 3609 passed the House under suspension of the rules on the same day, July 23, 2002, by a vote of 423–4 (Roll Call No. 334).
Since the H.R. 4 conference was already underway, the House-passed Pipeline Safety Bill (H.R. 3609) formed the House position in negotiations with the Senate during the conference and a compromise was negotiated between the House and the Senate with the participation of Science Committee conferees. On September 12, 2002, the Energy bill conferees approved the text of the negotiated pipeline safety portion of the bill, including provisions on RD&D, taken from the text of H.R. 3929. However, negotiations on the rest of the H.R. 4 Conference failed to reach a final agreement on the bill.
Page 93 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
On November 13, 2002, when it become clear that final action on an Energy bill was not possible, the Senate took up the House-passed free-standing pipeline safety bill (H.R. 3609), amended it to read as approved by the House and Senate Conferees on H.R. 4, and passed the bill by unanimous consent. Two days later, on November 15, 2002, the House approved the bill without objection and without further amendment. On December 9, 2002, H.R. 3609, Pipeline Infrastructure Protection to Enhance Security and Safety Act was presented to the President for signature.
The President signed the bill on December 17, 2002 and it became P.L. 107–355.
1.15—P.L. 107–368, National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002—Investing in America's Future Act of 2002 (H.R. 4664)
Background and Summary of Legislation
The 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 2,000 universities, colleges, K–12 schools, businesses, and other research institutions throughout the United States. 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 four percent of all federally funded research, the role of NSF in promoting fundamental research is vital to the Nation's scientific enterprise, as NSF provides approximately 25 percent of the federal support for basic research conducted at academic institutions.
Page 94 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
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. In fact, economists estimate that innovation and the application of new technology have generated at least half of the phenomenal growth in America's gross domestic product since World War II. As Allan Bromley, science advisor to former President George H.W. Bush, put it, ''No science, no surplus. It's that simple.''
Though NSF-funded research has had a tremendous impact on society, funding for NSF has not been sufficient to maximize the agency's potential contribution to the Nation's research enterprise. NSF is currently able to fund only about one third of the grant proposals submitted because of limited funds; 13 percent of top rated grant applications are not funded. More funding for basic science is needed to feed the innovation pipeline and to ensure future economic growth, as well as to strengthen homeland defense and national security.
NSF was most recently authorized by the National Science Foundation Act of 1998, which authorized appropriations for NSF for FY 1998, FY 1999, and FY 2000. In addition to the lapse in authorizations of appropriations for the agency, several policy issues—including ones related to the Foundation's responsibilities for large-scale research facilities—have arisen since the 1998 Act expired.
The National Science Authorization Act of 2002 sets the government's premier research agency—the National Science Foundation (NSF)—on the path to doubling its budget over the next five years. The bill authorizes 15 percent increases in each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007. Authorizations for FY 2006 and FY 2007 are contingent upon a Congressional determination that NSF has made progress toward meeting the President's five management goals. The bill also contains key provisions from four bills that passed the House by voice vote: H.R. 1858, H.R. 100, H.R. 3130, and H.R. 2051.
Page 95 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Funding
Research and Related Activities. The bill authorizes annual increases of approximately 15 percent for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007. Within this amount, specific increases are provided in FY 2003 and FY 2004 for networking and information technology research and nanoscale science and engineering.
Education and Human Resources. The bill authorizes annual increases of approximately 15 percent for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2007. These increases fund a variety of activities and initiatives including the following key programs:
Mathematics and Science Partnerships program (H.R. 1858), which is authorized at $200 million in FY 2003, $300 million in FY 2004, and $400 million in FY 2004;
Robert Noyce Scholarship Program (H.R. 1858), which is authorized at $20 million for each of fiscal years 2003 through 2005; and
Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology Talent Expansion Program (H.R. 3130), which is authorized at $25 million in FY 2003, $30 million in FY 2004, and $35 million in FY 2005.
Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction. The bill authorizes an increase of approximately 23 percent for each of fiscal years 2003 through FY 2005. These increases will enable the Foundation to complete projects that have already been initiated and reduce the backlog of large facilities projects that are awaiting funding.
Page 96 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
National Research Facilities
The bill will provide greater transparency in the process through which Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction projects are evaluated, prioritized, and selected for funding. The bill requires the Director to develop a numerically prioritized list of proposed projects indicating the relative priority of each for funding. Upon approval of the list by the National Science Board (NSB), a panel of 24 eminent scientists who are appointed by the President to advise NSF, the Director will be required to submit the list to Congress along with a report describing how the projects were prioritized. In addition, the Director is required to enter into an arrangement with the National Academy of Sciences to perform a study on setting priorities for a diverse array of disciplinary and interdisciplinary large research facility projects.
National Science Board
The National Science Board may not be complying with the spirit of the Government in the Sunshine Act (now contained in section 552b of Title 5 USC), which was intended to make meetings regarding a federal agencies' activities open to the public (with narrow statutory exemptions). The Board holds most of its meetings, including committee meetings where much of the Board's work gets done, behind closed doors, with a single session open to the public at the meeting's end. The bill affirms that all committees, subcommittees and task forces are subject to the Government in the Sunshine Act and requires the NSF Inspector General to conduct an annual compliance audit to ensure that these laws are complied with. The bill also ensures the independence of the Board by providing a separate budget line for its official activities and allowing it to hire its own staff.
Page 97 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Astronomy and Astrophysics
NSF and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) sponsor the majority of federally funded astronomy research in the United States. NSF has traditionally supported ground-based observatories and small research groups while NASA's strength has been the support of major space-based missions. The National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002, in response to concerns raised by a blue ribbon panel established last year by the National Research Council, establishes an interagency advisory board to provide systematic, comprehensive, and coordinated planning of astronomy and astrophysics research and investments. In addition, the bill emphasizes the importance of NSF's astronomical research and instrumentation program and authorizes NSF to continue supporting research that will advance our understanding of the origins and characteristics of planets and the universe.
Provisions from H.R. 1858, the Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act
Mathematics and Science Partnerships Program. The bill authorizes the NSF to carry out the President's Mathematics and Science Partnership program by making competitive, merit-reviewed awards to institutions of higher education working in partnership with school districts or state education agencies to develop programs that will better prepare future math and science teachers, provide professional development opportunities to current mathematics and science teachers, train a cadre of mathematics and science master teachers, and develop exemplary materials and opportunities for students. The bill also requires the Director to perform an assessment of the program utilizing a common set of benchmarks and tools so that projects funded under this program can be compared to determine best practices and materials. The Director is also required to work with the Secretary of Education to coordinate the work of this program with the related program at the Department of Education.
Page 98 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Robert Noyce Scholarship Program. The bill authorizes NSF to award grants to colleges and universities to make scholarships to talented math and science majors or minors in return for a commitment to teach at the elementary or secondary school level. Grants may also be used to award stipends to math or science professionals seeking to become teachers. A credentialed teacher who majored in his or her subject, not class size, is the greatest predictor of student achievement. Authorizes $20 million per year for each of FY 2003–2005. Authorizes funds for program administration in the out years.
Centers for Research on Mathematics and Science Learning and Education Improvement. Research findings from cognitive science, neuroscience and education are rarely translated into practical solutions for teachers. Based on the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences, this bill requires the Director to establish problem-oriented, multidisciplinary research centers focused on figuring out how the latest scientific findings about learning can be put to use by elementary and secondary school math and science teachers. At least one center will focus on developing ways in which research results can be applied, duplicated and scaled up for use in low-performing schools and each center will assess and improve the ways that information technology can be used to enhance science and mathematics teaching and learning.
Provisions from H.R. 100, the National Science Education Act
Master Teachers. The bill authorizes, as part of the Mathematics and Science Partnerships Program, NSF to award grants to support the training of master K–12 mathematics and science teachers.
Page 99 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Provisions from H.R. 3130, the Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology Education Improvement Act
The Technology Talent Program. The bill authorizes NSF to provide grants to institutions of higher education to increase the number and quality of graduates from physical science, mathematics, engineering, and technology degree and transfer programs (authorized at $25 million in FY 2002, and $30 million in each of Fiscal Years 2004 and 2005).
Undergraduate Education Reform. The bill authorizes NSF to provide grants to institutions of higher education to expand successful reform efforts and to stimulate changes in institutional policies and practices that place higher value on faculty participation in undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education.
Provisions from H.R. 2051, to provide for the establishment of regional plant genome and gene expression research and development centers
Plant Genome and Gene Expression Research Centers. The bill authorizes a merit-based, competitive program at NSF to provide grants to consortia of institutions of higher education and/or non-profit organizations to develop regional plant genome and gene expression research centers. These centers would conduct plant genomics and plant gene expression research.
Partnerships for Plant Biotechnology in the Developing World. The bill establishes a merit-based, competitive program at NSF to provide grants to institutions of higher education, non-profit organizations, or consortia thereof, to develop research partnerships supporting plant biotechnology targeted to the needs of the developing world. It also encourages NSF to include minority-serving institutions in consortia and requires that all partnerships include one or more research institutions from a developing nation.
Page 100 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
On May 7, 2002, Research Subcommittee Chairman Nick Smith, Full Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert, Committee Ranking Minority Member Ralph Hall, and Research Subcommittee Ranking Minority Member Eddie Bernice Johnson introduced H.R. 4664, the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002, a bill to authorize appropriations for Fiscal Years 2003, 2004, and 2005 for NSF. On May 8, 2002 it was referred to the Subcommittee on Research and a hearing was held.
The Subcommittee on Research met on Thursday, May 9, 2002, to consider the bill. An amendment was offered by Chairman Boehlert that changed the title of the bill to the Investing in America's Future Act of 2002. The amendment was adopted by a voice vote. The measure was ordered reported, as amended.
On May 22, 2002, the Committee on Science considered H.R. 4664. An Amendment was offered by Chairman Boehlert, which made technical changes to the bill and added provisions providing specific authorizations for the Advanced Technical Education Program and the Minority Serving Institutions Undergraduate Program. The amendment was adopted by a voice vote.
On June 4, 2002 the Committee on Science filed H.Rept. 107–488. H.R. 4664 passed the House, as amended, on June 5, 2002: Y–397, N–25 (Roll Call No. 212). On June 6, 2002 it was received in the Senate and referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and the measure was discharged on November 14, 2002.
Page 101 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
H.R. 4664 passed the Senate, with an amendment and an amendment to the title by a voice vote on November 14, 2002. On November 15, 2002, the House agreed to the Senate amendment by a voice vote clearing the measure for the President. The President signed H.R. 4664 on December 19, 2002, which became P.L. 107–368.
Chapter II—Other Legislative Activities of the Committee on Science
2.1—H.R. 4, Securing America's Future Energy Act of 2001
Background and Summary of Legislation
H.R. 4 is omnibus energy legislation, the purpose of which is, ''To enhance energy conservation, research and development and to provide for security and diversity in the energy supply for the American people, and for other purposes.'' The Science Committee developed the legislative provisions in Division B, relating to energy research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) and, working with the Committee on Energy and Commerce, Division E, relating to clean coal technology. Division B was taken from the text of H.R. 2460, the Comprehensive Energy Research and Technology Act of 2001, introduced by Science Committee Chairman, Sherwood Boehlert on July 11, 2001. The bill was the result of a series of hearings by the Committee on Science on energy R&D and the recommendations of the Administration's National Energy Policy Development Group, published in May, 2001. The bill was referred solely to the Committee on Science, which marked up the bill on July 18, 2001 and reported the bill to the full House on July 31, 2001 (H.Rept. 107–177). Division E, relating to Federal clean coal technology program authorizations, was also based on language in H.R. 2460, which was modified in negotiations with the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Ultimately, the House and Senate passed H.R. 4 as described below. A summary of Division B and E as passed by the House follows:
Page 102 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
I. Summary of Major Provisions of H.R. 4, Securing America's Future Energy (SAFE) Act of 2001
Division B: ''Comprehensive Energy Research and Technology Act of 2001''
Section 2001. Short Title
Subsection 2001 cites the division as the ''Comprehensive Energy Research and Technology Act of 2001.''
Section 2002. Findings.
Section 2003 contains the eight findings.
Section 2003. Purposes.
Section 2003 contains the eight purposes of the Act.
Section 2004. Goals.
Subsection 2004(a) states that, subject to subsection 2004(b), the Secretary should conduct a balanced energy RD&D and commercial application portfolio of programs guided by the specific goals listed for each of (1) Energy Conservation and Energy Efficiency, (2) Renewable Energy, (3) Nuclear Energy, (4) Fossil Energy and (5) Science.
Page 103 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2004(b) requires the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with others, to perform an assessment that establishes measurable cost and performance-based goals, or that modifies the goals under subsection (a), for 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020, for each of the programs authorized by this Act, that would enable each such program to meet the purposes under section 2003. The assessment is to be based on the latest scientific and technical knowledge, and shall also take into consideration, as appropriate, the comparative environmental impacts (including emissions of greenhouse gases) of the energy saved or produced by specific programs.
In establishing the measurable cost and performance-based goals under subsection 2004(b), subsection 2004(c) requires the Secretary to consult with the private sector, institutions of higher learning, national laboratories, environmental organizations, professional and technical societies, and any other persons the Secretary considers appropriate.
Subsection 2004(d) requires the Secretary, within 120 days of the date of enactment of this Act, to issue and publish in the Federal Register a set of draft measurable cost and performance-based goals for public comment for those programs established before the date of enactment of this Act. (In the case of a program not established before the date of the enactment of this Act, then not later than 120 days after the date of establishment of the program). Not later than 60 days after the date of publication, after taking into consideration any public comments received, the Secretary is to transmit to the Congress and publish in the Federal Register the final measurable cost and performance-based goals. Such goals must be updated on a biennial basis.
Section 2005. Definitions.
Page 104 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2005 defines the terms: (1) ''Administrator'' to mean the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); (2) ''appropriate congressional committees'' to mean (A) the Committee on Science and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives; and (B) the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate; (3) the ''Department'' to mean the Department of Energy; and (4) the ''Secretary'' to mean the Secretary of Energy.
Section 2006. Authorizations.
Section 2006 states that authorizations of appropriations under this Act are for environmental R&D, scientific and energy RD&D and commercial application of energy technology programs, projects, and activities. This is consistent with the Science Committee's jurisdiction under rule X, clause 1(n) of the Rules of the House.
Section 2007. Balance of Funding Priorities.
Subsection 2007(a) expresses the sense of the Congress that the funding of the various programs authorized by titles I through IV of this Act should remain in the same proportion to each other as provided in this Act, regardless of the total amount of funding made available for those programs.
If the amounts appropriated in general appropriations Acts for FY 2002, FY 2003, or FY 2004 for the programs authorized in titles I through IV of this Act are not in the same proportion to one another as are the authorizations for such programs in this Act, subsection 2207(b) requires the Secretary and the Administrator, within 60 days after the date of the enactment of the last general appropriations Act appropriating amounts for such programs, to transmit to the appropriate congressional committees a report describing the programs, projects, and activities that would have been funded if the proportions provided for in this Act had been maintained in the appropriations. The amount appropriated for the program receiving the highest percentage of its authorized funding for a fiscal year shall be used as the baseline for calculating the proportional deficiencies of appropriations for other programs in that fiscal year.
Page 105 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
TITLE I—ENERGY CONSERVATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Subtitle A—Alternative Fuel Vehicles
Section 2101. Short Title.
Subsection 2101 cites the subtitle as the ''Alternative Fuel Vehicle Acceleration Act of 2001.''
Section 2102. Definitions.
Section 2102 defines the terms ''alternative fuel vehicle,'' ''pilot program,'' and ''ultra-low sulfur diesel vehicle.''
Section 2103. Pilot Program.
Subsection 2103(a) directs the Secretary to establish an alternative fuel and ultra-low sulfur diesel vehicle energy demonstration and commercial application competitive grant pilot program to provide not more than 15 grants to State governments, local governments, or metropolitan transportation authorities to carry out a project or projects for the purposes described in subsection (b).
Subsection 2103(b) defines the purposes for which the grants may be used.
Page 106 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsections 2103(c), (d), and (e) set out the grant application requirements, selection criteria, and pilot project requirements, respectively.
Subsection 2103(e) limits: (1) the amount of an award to any one applicant to not more than $20.0 million; (2) the Federal cost share to not more than 50 percent; and (3) the length of the funding period to not more than five years. It also directs the Secretary to assure nationwide deployment of alternative fuel vehicles through broad geographic distribution of project sites; and to establish mechanisms that ensure the dissemination of information gained by the pilot program participants to all interested parties including all other applicants.
Subsection 2103(f) directs the Secretary to publish in the Federal Register, Commerce Business Daily, and elsewhere requests for project grant applications under the pilot program, which shall be due within six months after the notice publication. The Secretary shall select from among the project grant applications by a competitive, peer review process to award grants under the pilot program.
Section 2103(g) mandates that the Secretary shall provide not less than 20 percent and not more than 25 percent of the grant funding for the acquisition of ultra-low sulfur diesel vehicles.
Section 2104. Reports to Congress.
Section 2104 requires the Secretary to transmit an initial report to the appropriate congressional committees within two months after the grants are awarded detailing the successful applicants' projects, a listing of the applicants and a description of the information dissemination mechanism under 2103(e)(5). Not later than three years after the date of enactment, and annually thereafter until the program ends, the Secretary is required to transmit a report containing an evaluation of the pilot program's effectiveness to the same committees. This evaluation report is to include an assessment of the benefits to the environment derived from the projects included in the pilot program as well as an estimate of the potential benefits to the environment to be derived from widespread application of alternative fuel vehicles and ultra-low sulfur diesel vehicles.
Page 107 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2105. Authorization of Appropriations.
Section 2105 authorizes $200.0 million for FY 2002 for the pilot program, to remain available until expended.
TITLE I—ENERGY CONSERVATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Subtitle B—Distributed Power Hybrid Energy Systems
Section 2121. Findings.
Section 2121 lists 4 findings.
Section 2122. Definitions.
Section 2122 defines the terms ''distributed power hybrid system'' and ''distributed power source.''
Section 2123. Strategy.
Under subsection 2123(a), not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall develop and transmit to the Congress a distributed power hybrid systems strategy showing: (1) needs best met with distributed power hybrid systems configurations, especially systems including one or more solar or renewable power sources; and (2) technology gaps and barriers (including barriers to efficient connection with the power grid) that impede the use of distributed power hybrid systems.
Page 108 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2123(b) specifies five elements the strategy should address, including a comprehensive RD&D and commercial application program to ensure the reliability, efficiency, and environmental integrity of distributed energy resources.
Subsection 2123(c) requires the Secretary to implement the strategy transmitted under subsection 2123(a) and the research program under subsection 2123(b). Activities pursuant to the strategy are to be integrated with other activities of the DOE's Office of Power Technologies.
Section 2124. High Power Density Industry Program.
Subsection 2124(a) requires the Secretary to develop and implement a comprehensive RD&D and commercial application program to improve energy efficiency, reliability, and environmental responsibility in high power density industries, such as data centers, server farms, telecommunications facilities, and heavy industry.
Subsection 2124(b) provides that in carrying out this section, the Secretary shall consider technologies that provide: (1) significant improvement in efficiency of high power density facilities, and in data and telecommunications centers, using advanced thermal control technologies; (2) significant improvements in air conditioning efficiency in facilities such as data centers and telecommunications facilities; (3) significant advances in peak load reduction; and (4) advanced real time metering and load management and control devices.
Subsection 2124(c) requires that activities pursuant to this program be integrated with other activities of the DOE's Office of Power Technologies.
Page 109 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2125. Micro-Cogeneration Energy Technology.
Section 2125 requires the Secretary to make competitive, merit-based grants to consortia of private sector entities for the development of micro-cogeneration energy technology. The consortia shall explore the creation of small-scale combined heat and power through the use of residential heating appliances. The section also authorizes $20.0 million, to remain available until expended.
Section 2126. Program Plan.
Section 2126 directs the Secretary to consult with appropriate representatives of the distributed energy resources, power transmission, and high power density industries, other appropriate entities, and Federal, State and local agencies, within four months of enactment, to present to Congress a five-year program plan to guide activities under this subtitle.
Section 2127. Report.
Section 2127 instructs the Secretary, jointly with other appropriate Federal agencies, to report to Congress within two years of enactment and every two years thereafter for the duration of the program on the program's progress made to achieve the purposes of this subtitle.
Section 2128. Voluntary Consensus Standards.
Page 110 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Under this section, not later than two years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in consultation with the NIST, shall work with the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers and other standards development organizations toward the development of voluntary consensus standards for distributed energy systems for use in manufacturing and using equipment and systems for connection with electric distribution systems, for obtaining electricity from, or providing electricity to, such systems.
TITLE I—ENERGY CONSERVATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Subtitle C—Secondary Electric Vehicle Battery Use
Section 2131. Definitions.
Section 2131 defines the terms ''battery'' and ''associated equipment.''
Section 2132. Establishment of Secondary Electric Vehicle Battery Use Program.
Subsection 2132(a) directs the Secretary to establish and carry out a RD&D program for the secondary use of batteries originally used in transportation applications. The program should demonstrate the use of batteries in secondary application, including utility and commercial power storage and power quality and should be structured to evaluate the performance, including longevity of useful service life and costs, of such batteries in field operations, and evaluate the necessary supporting infrastructure, including disposal and reuse of batteries. The Secretary is directed to coordinate with ongoing secondary battery use programs underway at the national laboratories and in industry.
Page 111 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2132(b) directs the Secretary, no later than six months after the date of the enactment of this Act, to solicit proposals to demonstrate the secondary use of batteries and associated equipment and supporting infrastructure in geographic locations throughout the United States. The Secretary may make additional solicitations for proposals if the Secretary determines that such solicitations are necessary to carry out this section. Proposals submitted in response to a solicitation under this section shall include: (1) a description of the project, including the batteries to be used in the project; the proposed locations and applications for the batteries; the number of batteries to be demonstrated; and the type, characteristics, and estimated life-cycle costs of the batteries compared to other energy storage devices currently in use; (2) the contribution, if any, of State or local governments and other persons to the demonstration project; (3) the type of associated equipment to be demonstrated and the type of supporting infrastructure to be demonstrated; and (4) any other information the Secretary considers appropriate. If the proposal includes a lease arrangement, the proposal shall indicate the terms of such lease arrangement for the batteries and associated equipment.
Subsection 2132(c) directs the Secretary, no later than three months after the closing date established by the Secretary for receipt of proposals under subsection 2132(b), to select at least five proposals to receive financial assistance under this subsection. No one project selected is permitted to receive more than 25 percent of the funds authorized under this section, and no more than three projects selected under this section shall demonstrate the same battery type.
In selecting a proposal under subsection 2132(c), the Secretary must consider:
Page 112 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
(1) the ability of the proposer to acquire the batteries and associated equipment and to successfully manage and conduct the demonstration project, including the reporting requirements;
(2) the geographic and climatic diversity of the projects selected;
(3) the long-term technical and competitive viability of the batteries to be used in the project and of the original manufacturer of such batteries;
(4) the suitability of the batteries for their intended uses;
(5) the technical performance of the battery, including the expected additional useful life and the battery's ability to retain energy;
(6) the environmental effects of the use of and disposal of the batteries proposed to be used in the project selected;
(7) the extent of involvement of State or local government and other persons in the demonstration project and whether such involvement will permit a reduction of the Federal cost share per project or otherwise be used to allow the Federal contribution to be provided to demonstrate a greater number of batteries; and
(8) such other criteria as the Secretary considers appropriate.
The Secretary must require that as a part of a demonstration project, the users of the batteries provide to the proposer information regarding the operation, maintenance, performance, and use of the batteries, and the proposer provide such information to the battery manufacturer, for three years after the beginning of the demonstration project.
Page 113 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
The Secretary must also require the proposer to provide to the Secretary information regarding the operation, maintenance, performance, and use of the batteries that the Secretary may request during the period of the demonstration project. The proposer must provide at least 50 percent of the costs associated with the proposal.
Section 2133. Authorization of Appropriations.
Section 2133 authorizes (from amounts authorized under section 2161(a) ) for purposes of this subtitle $1.0 million for FY 2002, $7.0 million for FY 2003 and $7.0 million for FY 2004, to remain available until expended.
TITLE I—ENERGY CONSERVATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Subtitle D—Green School Buses
Section 2141. Short Title.
Section 2141 cites the subtitle as the ''Clean Green School Bus Act of 2001.''
Section 2142. Establishment of Pilot.
Subsection 2142(a) directs the Secretary to establish a pilot program for awarding grants on a competitive basis to eligible entities for the demonstration and commercial application of alternative fuel school buses and ultra-low sulfur diesel school buses.
Page 114 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2142(b) requires the Secretary, no later than three months after the date of enactment of this Act, to establish and publish in the Federal Register grant requirements on eligibility for assistance, and on implementation of the program established under subsection (a), including certification requirements to ensure compliance with this subtitle.
Subsection 2142(c) requires the Secretary, no later than six months after the date of enactment of this Act, to solicit proposals for grants under this section.
Subsection 2142(d) requires that a grant be awarded, under this section only, to a local governmental entity responsible for providing school bus service for one or more public school systems or, jointly with a contracting entity that provides school bus service to the public school system or systems.
Subsection 2142(e) requires that grants under this section shall be for the demonstration and commercial application of technologies to facilitate the use of alternative fuel school buses and ultra-low sulfur diesel school buses in lieu of buses manufactured before model year 1977 and diesel-powered buses manufactured before model year 1991. Other than the receipt of the grant, a recipient of a grant under this section may not receive any economic benefit in connection with the receipt of the grant. When awarding grants, the Secretary shall give priority to applicants who can demonstrate the use of alternative fuel buses and ultra-low sulfur diesel school buses in lieu of buses manufactured before model year 1977.
Subsection 2142(f) requires that a grant provided under this section shall include the following conditions:
Page 115 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
(1) all buses acquired with funds provided under the grant shall be operated as part of the school bus fleet for which the grant was made for a minimum of five years;
(2) funds provided under the grant may only be used to pay the cost, except as provided in the following paragraph (3), of new alternative fuel school buses or ultra-low sulfur diesel school buses, including State taxes and contract fees to provide—
(i) up to 10 percent of the price of the alternative fuel school buses acquired, for necessary alternative fuel infrastructure if the infrastructure will only be available to the grant recipient; and
(ii) up to 15 percent of the price of the alternative fuel school buses acquired, for necessary alternative fuel infrastructure if the infrastructure will be available to the grant recipient and to other bus fleets;
(3) the grant recipient shall be required to provide at least the lesser of 15 percent of the total cost of each bus received or $15,000 per bus;
(4) in the case of a grant recipient receiving a grant to demonstrate ultra-low sulfur diesel school buses, the grant recipient shall be required to provide documentation to the satisfaction of the Secretary that diesel fuel containing sulfur at not more than 15 parts per million (PPM) is available for carrying out the purposes of the grant, and a commitment by the applicant to use such fuel in carrying out the purposes of the grant.
Page 116 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2142(g) requires that funding under a grant made under this section may be used to demonstrate the use only of new alternative fuel school buses or ultra-low sulfur diesel school buses:
(1) with a gross vehicle weight of greater than 14,000 pounds;
(2) that are powered by a heavy duty engine;
(3) that, in the case of alternative fuel school buses, emit not more than—
(A) 2.5 grams per brake horsepower-hour of non-methane hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen and 0.01 grams per brake horsepower-hour of particulate matter for buses manufactured in model years 2001 and 2002; and
(B) 1.8 grams per brake horsepower-hour of non-methane hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen and 0.01 grams per brake horsepower-hour of particulate matter for buses manufactured in model years 2003 through 2006; and
(4) that, in the case of ultra-low sulfur diesel school buses, emit not more than—
(A) 3.0 grams per brake horsepower-hour of non-methane hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen and 0.01 grams per brake horsepower-hour of particulate matter for buses manufactured in model years 2001 through 2003; and
(B) 2.5 grams per brake horsepower-hour of non-methane hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen and 0.01 grams per brake horsepower-hour of particulate matter for buses manufactured in model years 2004 through 2006, except that under no circumstances shall buses be acquired under this section that emit non-methane hydrocarbons, oxides of nitrogen, or particulate matter at a rate greater than the best performing technology of ultra-low sulfur diesel school buses commercially available at the time the grant is made.
Page 117 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2142(h) requires the Secretary, to the maximum extent practicable, to achieve nationwide deployment of alternative fuel school buses through the program under this section, and to ensure a broad geographic distribution of grant awards, with a goal of no State receiving more than 10 percent of the grant funding made available under this section for a fiscal year.
Subsection 2142(i) requires the Secretary to provide not less than 20 percent and not more than 25 percent of the grant funding made available under this section for any fiscal year for the acquisition of ultra-low sulfur diesel school buses.
Subsection 2142(j) defines the term ''alternative fuel school bus'' to mean a bus powered substantially by electricity (including electricity supplied by a fuel cell), or by liquefied natural gas, compressed natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, hydrogen, propane, or methanol or ethanol at no less than 85 percent by volume. It also defines the term ''ultra-low sulfur diesel school bus'' to mean a school bus powered by diesel fuel which contains not more than 15 PPM sulfur.
Section 2143. Fuel Cell Development and Demonstration Program.
Subsection 2143(a) requires the Secretary to establish a program for entering into cooperative agreements with private-sector fuel cell bus developers for the development of fuel-cell-powered school buses, and subsequently with not less than two units of local government using natural-gas-powered school buses and such private sector fuel cell bus developers to demonstrate the use of fuel-cell-powered school buses.
Page 118 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2143(b) requires the non-Federal contribution for activities funded under this section to be no less than 20 percent for fuel infrastructure development activities and no less than 50 percent for demonstration activities and for non-fuel infrastructure development activities.
Subsection 2143(c) limits the amount authorized under section 2144 that may be used for carrying out this section for the period encompassing FY 2002 through FY 2006 to no more than $25.0 million.
Subsection 2143(d) requires the Secretary, no later than three years after the date of enactment of this Act, and, again, no later than October 1, 2006, to transmit to Congress a report that evaluates the process of converting natural gas infrastructure to accommodate fuel-cell-powered school buses and assesses the results of the development and demonstration program under this section.
Section 2144. Authorization of Appropriations.
Section 2144 authorizes $40.0 million for FY 2002, $50.0 million for FY 2003, $60.0 million for FY 2004, $70.0 million for FY 2005, and $80.0 million for FY 2006, to remain available until expended, to carry out this subtitle.
TITLE I—ENERGY CONSERVATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Subtitle E—Next Generation Lighting
Page 119 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2151. Short Title.
Section 2151 cites the subtitle as ''Next Generation Lighting Initiative Act.''
Section 2152. Definition.
Section 2152 defines the term ''Lighting Initiative'' to mean the ''Next Generation Lighting Initiative'' established under subsection 2153(a).
Section 2153. Next Generation Lighting Initiative.
Subsection 2153(a) authorizes the Secretary to establish a Lighting Initiative to be known as the ''Next Generation Lighting Initiative'' to research, develop, and conduct demonstration activities on advanced lighting technologies, including white light emitting diodes.
Subsection 2153(b) states the research objectives of the Lighting Initiative to develop, by 2011, advanced lighting technologies that, compared to incandescent and fluorescent lighting technologies as of the date of the enactment of this Act, are longer lasting, more energy-efficient and cost-competitive.
Section 2154. Study.
Page 120 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2154(a) requires the Secretary, in consultation with other Federal agencies, as appropriate, no later than six months after the date of enactment of this Act, to complete a study on strategies for the development and commercial application of advanced lighting technologies. The Secretary shall request a review by the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering of the study under this subsection, and shall transmit the results of the study to the appropriate congressional committees.
Subsection 2154(b) requires that the study include the development of a comprehensive strategy to implement the Lighting Initiative and identifying the research and development, manufacturing, deployment, and marketing barriers that must be overcome to achieve a goal of a 25 percent market penetration by advanced lighting technologies into the incandescent and fluorescent lighting market by the year 2012.
Subsection 2154(c) requires the Secretary to modify the implementation of the Lighting Initiative, if necessary, to take into consideration the recommendations of the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering, as soon as practicable after the review of the study under subsection 2154(a) is transmitted to the Secretary by the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering.
Section 2155. Grant Program.
Subsection 2155(a) permits the Secretary to make merit-based competitive grants to firms and research organizations that conduct RD&D projects related to advanced lighting technologies, subject to section 2603 of this Act.
Page 121 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2155(b) requires an annual independent review of the grant-related activities of firms and research organizations receiving a grant under this section to be conducted by a committee appointed by the Secretary under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.), or, at the request of the Secretary, a committee appointed by the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering. Using clearly defined standards established by the Secretary, the review shall assess technology advances and progress toward commercialization of the grant-related activities of firms or research organizations during each fiscal year of the grant program.
Subsection 2155(c) requires the national laboratories and other Federal agencies, as appropriate, to cooperate with and provide technical and financial assistance to firms and research organizations.
TITLE I—ENERGY CONSERVATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Subtitle F—Department of Energy Authorization of Appropriations
Section 2161. Authorization of Appropriations.
Subsection 2161(a) authorizes $625.0 million for FY 2002, $700.0 million for FY 2003; and (3) $800 million for FY 2004 for Energy Conservation operation and maintenance (including Building Technology, State and Community Sector, Industry Sector, Transportation Sector, Power Technologies, and Policy and Management), to remain available until expended. These amount are in addition to: (1) $200.0 million authorized for FY 2002 under section 2105 for alternative fuel and ultra-low sulfur diesel vehicles; (2) $20.0 million for FY 2002 authorized under section 2125 for micro-cogeneration energy technology; and (3) $40.0 million for FY 2002, $50.0 million for FY 2003, and $60.0 million for FY 2004 authorized under section 2144 for green school buses.
Page 122 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2161(b) provides that none of the funds authorized to be appropriated in subsection 2131(a) may be used for: ''(1) Building Technology, State and Community Sector—(A) Residential Building Energy Codes; (B) Commercial Building Energy Codes; (C) Lighting and Appliance Standards; (D) Weatherization Assistance Program; (E) State Energy Program; or (2) Federal Energy Management Program.'' These limitations are included to preserve the Science Committee's sole jurisdiction over the bill since the jurisdiction of programs under this subsection 2131(b) either resides with the Committee on Energy and Commerce or is shared with that Committee.
TITLE I—ENERGY CONSERVATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Subtitle G—Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air and Radiation Authorization of Appropriations
Section 2171. Short Title.
Section 2171 cites the subtitle as the ''Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air and Radiation Authorization Act of 2001.''
Section 2172. Authorization of Appropriations.
Section 2172 authorizes to be appropriated to the Administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation Climate Change Protection Programs $121.942 million for FY 2002, $126.8 million for FY 2003, and $131.8 million for FY 2004, to remain available until expended, of which:
Page 123 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
(1) $52.731 million for FY 2002, $54.8 million for FY 2003, and $57.0 million for FY 2004 shall be for Buildings;
(2) $32.441 million for FY 2002, $33.7 million for FY 2003, and $35.0 million for FY 2004 shall be for Transportation;
(3) $27.295 million FY 2002, $28.4 million for FY 2003, and $29.5 million for FY 2004 shall be for Industry;
(4) $1.7 million for FY 2002, $1.8 million FY 2003, and $1.9 million for FY 2004 shall be for Carbon Removal;
(5) $2.5 million for FY 2002, $2.6 million for FY 2003, and $2.7 million for FY 2004 shall be for State and Local Climate; and
(6) $5.275 million for FY 2002, $5.5 million for FY 2003, and $5.7 million for FY 2004 shall be for International Capacity Building.
Section 2173. Limits on Use of Funds.
Subsection 2173(a) prohibits EPA from using funds to produce or provide articles or services for the purpose of selling the articles or services to a person outside the Federal Government, unless the Administrator determines that comparable articles or services are not available from a commercial source in the United States.
Page 124 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2173(b) prohibits EPA from using funds to prepare or initiate Requests for Proposals for a program if Congress has not authorized the program.
Section 2174. Cost Sharing.
Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, subsection 2174(a) mandates that for R&D programs carried out under this subtitle, the Administrator shall require a commitment from non-Federal sources of at least 20 percent of the cost of the project. The Administrator may reduce or eliminate the non-Federal requirement under this subsection if the Administrator determines that the R&D is of a basic or fundamental nature.
Similarly, under subsection 2174(b) the Administrator shall require at least 50 percent of the costs directly and specifically related to any demonstration or commercial application project under this subtitle to be provided from non-Federal sources. The Administrator may reduce the non-Federal requirement under this subsection if the Administrator determines that the reduction is necessary and appropriate considering the technological risks involved in the project and is necessary to meet the objectives of this subtitle.
In calculating the amount of the non-Federal commitment under subsection (a) or (b), subsection 2174(c) permits the Administrator to include personnel, services, equipment, and other resources.
Section 2175. Limitations on Demonstrations and Commercial Application of Energy Technology.
Page 125 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2175 requires the Administrator to provide funding only for scientific or energy demonstration or commercial application programs, projects or activities for technologies or processes that can reasonably be expected to yield new, measurable benefits to the cost, efficiency, or performance of the technology or process.
Section 2176. Reprogramming.
Section 2176 prohibits the reprogramming of funds in excess of 105 percent of the amount authorized for a program, project, or activity, or in excess of $0.25 million above the amount authorized for the program, program, project, or activity until the Administrator submits a report to the appropriate congressional committees and a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on which the report is received. Such reprogramming of funds is limited to no more than the total amount authorized to be appropriated by this subtitle and such funds may not be reprogrammed or used for a program, project, or activity for which Congress has not authorized appropriation.
Section 2177. Budget Request Format.
Section 2177 requires the Administrator to provide to the appropriate congressional committees, to be transmitted at the same time as the EPA's annual budget request submission, a detailed justification for budget authorization for the programs, projects, and activities for which funds are authorized by this subtitle.
Each such document shall include, for the fiscal year for which funding is being requested and for the two previous fiscal years: (1) a description of, and funding requested or allocated for, each such program, project, or activity; (2) an identification of all recipients of funds to conduct such programs, projects, and activities; and (3) an estimate of the amounts to be expended by each recipient of funds under (2).
Page 126 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2178. Other Provisions.
Subsection 2178(a) requires the Administrator to provide simultaneously to the Committee on Science: (1) any annual operating plan or other operational funding document, including any additions or amendments thereto; and (2) any report relating to the environmental research or development, scientific or energy research, development, or demonstration, or commercial application of energy technology programs, projects, or activities of the EPA, provided to any committee of Congress.
Subsection 2178(b) requires the Administrator to provide notice to the appropriate congressional committees not later than 15 days before any reorganization of any environmental research or development, scientific or energy research, development, or demonstration, or commercial application of energy technology program, project, or activity of the Office of Air and Radiation.
TITLE I—ENERGY CONSERVATION AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Subtitle H—National Building Performance Initiative
Not later than three months after the date of the enactment of this Act, subsection 2181(a) requires the Director of the OSTP to establish an Interagency Group responsible for the development and implementation of a National Building Performance Initiative to address energy conservation and R&D and related issues. The NIST shall provide necessary administrative support for the Interagency Group.
Page 127 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Under subsection 2181(b), not later than nine months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Interagency Group shall transmit to the Congress a multiyear implementation plan describing the Federal role in reducing the costs, including energy costs, of using, owning, and operating commercial, institutional, residential, and industrial buildings by 30 percent by 2020. The plan shall include: (1) RD&D of systems and materials for new construction and retrofit, on the building envelope and components; and (2) the collection and dissemination, in a usable form, of research results and other pertinent information to the design and construction industry, government officials, and the general public.
Subsection 2181(c) requires the establishment of a National Building Performance Advisory Committee to advise on creation of the plan, review progress made under the plan, advise on any improvements that should be made to the plan, and report to the Congress on actions that have been taken to advance the Nation's capability in furtherance of the plan. The members shall include representatives of a broad cross-section of interests such as the research, technology transfer, architectural, engineering, and financial communities; materials and systems suppliers; State, county, and local governments; the residential, multi-family, and commercial sectors of the construction industry; and the insurance industry.
Subsection 2181(d) requires the Interagency Group, within 90 days after the end of each fiscal year, to transmit a report to the Congress describing progress achieved during the preceding fiscal year by government at all levels and by the private sector, toward implementing the plan developed under subsection (b), and including any amendments to the plan.
TITLE II—RENEWABLE ENERGY
Page 128 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subtitle A—Hydrogen
Section 2201. Short Title.
Section 2201 cites the subtitle as the ''Robert S. Walker and George E. Brown, Jr. Hydrogen Energy Act of 2001.''
Section 2202. Purposes.
Section 2202 amends section 102(b) the Spark M. Matsunaga Hydrogen RD&D Act of 1990 (1990 Act) to include RD&D activities leading to the use of hydrogen for commercial applications, information dissemination and education, and development of a hydrogen production methodology that minimizes adverse environmental impacts, including efficient and cost-effective production from renewable and nonrenewable resources.
Section 2203. Definitions.
Section 2203 amends section 102(c) of the 1990 Act to include the definition of ''advisory committee.''
Section 2204. Reports to Congress.
Section 2204 amends section 103 of the 1990 Act by requiring the Secretary to submit to Congress a detailed report on the status and progress of the programs and activities authorized under the Act within one year of its enactment, and biennially thereafter.
Page 129 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2205. Hydrogen Research and Development.
Section 2205 amends section 104 of the 1990 Act by streamlining the text. Also, for R&D programs carried out under this section, the Secretary shall require a commitment from non-Federal sources of at least 20 percent of the cost of the project. The Secretary may reduce or eliminate the non-Federal requirement under this subsection if the Secretary determines that the R&D is of a basic or fundamental nature.
Section 2206. Demonstrations.
Section 2206 amends section 105 of the 1990 Act by eliminating the requirement that demonstration of critical technologies and small-scale demonstrations be conducted in or at ''self-contained locations.'' In addition, the small-scale demonstrations are to include a fuel cell bus demonstration program to address hydrogen production, storage, and use in transit bus applications.
Section 2207. Technology Transfer.
Section 2207 amends section 106 of the 1990 Act by requiring the Secretary to conduct a hydrogen technology transfer program designed to accelerate wider application of hydrogen production, storage, transportation and use technologies, including application in foreign countries to increase the global market for hydrogen technologies and foster global economic development without harmful environmental effects.
Page 130 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2208. Coordination and Consultation.
Section 2208 amends section 107 of the 1990 Act by requiring the Secretary to establish a central point for coordination of all DOE hydrogen RD&D activities. It also requires the Secretary to consult with other Federal agencies, as appropriate, and the advisory committee established under section 2209.
Section 2209. Advisory Committee.
Section 2209 amends section 108 of the 1990 Act by requiring the Secretary to enter into arrangements with the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering to establish an advisory committee to replace the current Hydrogen Technical Advisory Panel.
Section 2210. Authorization of Appropriations.
Subsection 2210 amends section 109 of the 1990 Act to provide authorization of appropriations for the five-year period, FY 2002 through FY 2006.
Subsection 2210(a) authorizes $40.0 million for FY 2002, $45.0 million for FY 2003, $50.0 million for FY 2004, $55.0 million for FY 2005, and $60.0 million for FY 2006 for hydrogen R&D activities and the advisory committee.
Subsection 2210(b) authorizes $20.0 million for FY 2002, $25.0 million for FY 2003, $30.0 million for FY 2004, $35.0 million for FY 2005, and $40.0 million for FY 2006 for hydrogen demonstration activities.
Page 131 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2211. Repeal.
Section 2211 amends the Hydrogen Future Act of 1996 to repeal title II containing the program relating to the integration of fuel cells with hydrogen production systems.
TITLE II—RENEWABLE ENERGY
Subtitle B—Bioenergy
Section 2221. Short Title.
Section 2221 cites the subtitle as the ''Bioenergy Act of 2001.''
Section 2222. Findings.
Section 2222 lists five findings.
Section 2223. Definitions.
Section 2223 defines the terms ''bioenergy,'' ''biofuels,'' ''biopower,'' and ''integrated bioenergy research and development.''
Section 2224. Authorizations.
Page 132 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2224 authorizes the Secretary to conduct bioenergy-related RD&D and commercial application programs, projects, and activities, including: (1) biopower energy systems, (2) biofuels energy systems, and (3) integrated bioenergy R&D.
Section 2225. Authorization of Appropriations.
As shown in the following table, subsections 2225(a), 2225(b), and 2225(c) authorize a total of $912.2 million for Biopower Energy Systems, Biofuels Energy Systems, and Integrated Bioenergy R&D for the five-year period, FY 2002 through FY 2006.
Also, Integrated Bioenergy R&D activities funded under subsection 2225(c) are to be coordinated with ongoing related programs of other Federal agencies, including the NSF Plant Genome Program.
Subsection 2225(d) authorizes amounts under this subtitle to be used to assist in the planning, design, and implementation of projects to convert rice straw and barley grain into biopower or biofuels.
TITLE II—RENEWABLE ENERGY
Subtitle C—Transmission Infrastructure Systems
Section 2241. Transmission Infrastructure Systems RD&D and commercial Application.
Subsection 2241(a) requires the Secretary to develop and implement a comprehensive RD&D and commercial application program to ensure the reliability, efficiency, and environmental integrity of electrical transmission systems. Such program shall include advanced energy technologies and systems, high capacity superconducting transmission lines and generators, advanced grid reliability and efficiency technologies development, technologies contributing to significant load reductions, advanced metering, load management and control technologies, and technology transfer and education.
Page 133 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
In carrying out this subtitle, subsection 2241(b) allows the Secretary to include RD&D on and commercial application of improved transmission technologies including the integration of the following technologies into improved transmission systems: (1) high temperature superconductivity; (2) advanced transmission materials; (3) self-adjusting equipment, processes, or software for survivability, security, and failure containment; (4) enhancements of energy transfer over existing lines; and (5) any other infrastructure technologies, as appropriate.
Section 2242. Program Plan.
Section 2242 requires the Secretary, within four months after the date of the enactment of this Act and in consultation with other appropriate Federal agencies, to prepare and transmit to Congress a five-year program plan to guide activities under this subtitle. In preparing the program plan, the Secretary shall consult with appropriate representatives of the transmission infrastructure systems industry to select and prioritize appropriate program areas. The Secretary shall also seek the advice of utilities, energy services providers, manufacturers, institutions of higher learning, other appropriate State and local agencies, environmental organizations, professional and technical societies, and any other persons as the Secretary considers appropriate.
Section 2243. Report.
Under section 2243, two years after the date of the enactment of this Act, and at two year intervals thereafter, the Secretary, in consultation with other appropriate Federal agencies, shall transmit a report to Congress describing the progress made to achieve the purposes of this subtitle and identifying any additional resources needed to continue the development and commercial application of transmission infrastructure technologies.
Page 134 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
TITLE II—RENEWABLE ENERGY
Subtitle D—Authorization of Appropriations
Section 2261. Authorization of Appropriations.
Including the amounts authorized for hydrogen R&D under section 2210 and for bioenergy R&D under section 2225, subsection 261(a) authorizes $535.0 million for FY 2002, $639.0 million for FY 2003, and $683.0 million for FY 2004 for Renewable Energy operation and maintenance, including subtitle C (Transmission Infrastructure Systems), Geothermal Technology Development, Hydropower, Concentrating Solar Power, Photovoltaic Energy Systems, Solar Building Technology Research, Wind Energy Systems, High Temperature Superconducting Research and Development, Energy Storage Systems, Transmission Reliability, International Renewable Energy Program, Renewable Energy Production Incentive Program, Renewable Program Support, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and Program Direction, to remain available until expended.
Subsection 2281(b) requires the Secretary to carry out a research program, in conjunction with other appropriate Federal agencies, on wave powered electric generation within the amounts authorized under subsection 2281(a).
Using funds authorized in subsection 2281(a), subsection 2281(c) requires the Secretary to transmit to the Congress, within one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, an assessment of all renewable energy resources available within the United States. The report shall include a detailed inventory describing the available amount and characteristics of solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, hydroelectric, and other renewable energy sources, and an estimate of the costs needed to develop each resource. The report shall also include such other information as the Secretary believes would be useful in sitting renewable energy generation, such as appropriate terrain, population and load centers, nearby energy infrastructure, and location of energy resources. The information and cost estimates in this report shall be updated annually and made available to the public, along with the data used to create the report. This subsection shall expire at the end of FY 2004.
Page 135 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2261(d) provides that none of the funds authorized to be appropriated in subsection 2241(a) may be used for: ''(1) Departmental Energy Management Program; or (2) Renewable Indian Energy Resources.'' These limitations are included to preserve the Science Committee's sole jurisdiction over the bill, since the jurisdiction of these programs either resides with the Committee on Energy and Commerce, or is shared with that Committee.
TITLE III—NUCLEAR ENERGY
Subtitle A—University Nuclear Science and Engineering
Section 2301. Short Title.
Section 2301 cites the subtitle as the ''Department of Energy University Nuclear Science and Engineering Act.''
Section 2302. Findings.
Section 2302 lists three findings.
Section 2303. Department of Energy Program.
Subsection 2303(a) directs the Secretary, through the Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology (Office) to maintain the Nation's human resource investment and infrastructure related to civilian nuclear R&D.
Page 136 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2303(b) requires the Director of the Office to: (1) develop a robust graduate and undergraduate program to attract new students; (2) develop a Junior Faculty Research Initiation Grant to recruit and maintain new faculty; (3) maintain investment in the Nuclear Engineering Education Research Program; (4) encourage collaborative nuclear research between industry, national labs and universities through Nuclear Energy Research Initiative (NERI); (5) support public outreach regarding nuclear science and engineering; and (6) support communication and outreach related to nuclear science and engineering.
Subsection 2303(c) directs the Office to provide for: (1) university research reactor refueling with low enriched fuels, operational instrumentation upgrading, and reactor sharing among universities; (2) assistance in relicensing and upgrading university training reactors as part of a student training program in collaboration with the U.S. nuclear industry; and (3) awards for reactor improvements for research, training and education.
Subsection 2303(d) directs the Secretary to develop a program in the Office for: nuclear science and technology sabbatical fellowships for university professors at the Department labs and for student fellowships at Department labs; and a visiting scientist program for Department lab staff to visit universities' nuclear science programs to work with faculty and staff.
Subsection 2303(e) requires the host institution to provide at least 50 percent of the cost of a university research reactor's operation when funds authorized under this subtitle are used to supplement operation of such research reactor.
Page 137 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2303(f) requires that all grants, contracts, cooperative agreements or other financial assistance awards under this Act be made based on independent merit review.
Subsection 2303(g) requires the Secretary to prepare a report within six months of enactment of this Act, laying out a five-year plan on the programs authorized in this section. This report is to be delivered to the appropriate congressional committees.
Section 2304. Authorization of Appropriations.
Subsection 2304(a) authorizes total appropriation of funds to carry out the purposes of this subtitle and for all funds to remain available until expended: $30.2 million for FY 2002; $41.0 million for FY 2003; $47.9 million for FY 2004; $55.6 million for FY 2005; and $64.1 million for FY 2006.
For the Graduate and Undergraduate Fellowships to carry out subsection 2303(b)(1) from the funds authorized in subsection 2304(a), subsection 2304(b) authorizes $3.0 million for FY 2002, $3.1 million for FY 2003, $3.2 million for FY 2004, $3.2 million for FY 2005, and $3.2 million for FY 2006.
For the Junior Faculty Research Initiation Grant Program to carry out subsection 2303(b)(2) from the funds authorized in subsection 2304(a), subsection 2304(c) authorizes $5.0 million for FY 2002, $7.0 million for FY 2003, $8.0 million for FY 2004, $9.0 million for FY 2005, and $10.0 million for FY 2006.
Page 138 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
For the Nuclear Engineering and Education Research Program to carry out subsection 2303(b)(3) from the funds authorized in subsection 2304(a), subsection 2304(d) authorizes $8.0 million for FY 2002, $12.0 million for FY 2003, $13.0 million for FY 2004, $15.0 million for FY 2005, and $20.0 million for FY 2006.
For Communication and Outreach Related to Nuclear Science and Engineering to carry out subsection 2303(b)(5) from the funds authorized in subsection 2304(a), subsection 2304(e) authorizes $0.2 million for each of FY 2002 and FY 2003, and $0.3 million for each of FY 2004 through FY 2006.
For Refueling of Research Reactors and Instrumentation Upgrades to carry out subsection 2303(c)(1) from the funds authorized in subsection 2304(a), subsection 2304(f) authorizes $6.0 million for FY 2002, $6.5 million for FY 2003, $7.0 million for FY 2004, $7.5 million for FY 2005, and $8.0 million for FY 2006.
For Relicensing Assistance to carry out subsection 2303(c)(2) from the funds authorized in subsection 2304(a), subsection 2304(g) authorizes $1.0 million for FY 2002, $1.1 million for FY 2003, $1.2 million for FY 2004, and $1.3 million for each of FY 2005 and FY 2006.
For the Reactor Research and Training Award Program to carry out subsection 2303(c)(3) from the funds authorized in subsection 2304(a), subsection 2304(h) authorizes $6.0 million for FY 2002, $10.0 million for FY 2003, $14.0 million for FY 2004, $18.0 million for FY 2005, and $20.0 million for FY 2006.
Page 139 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
For University-Department Laboratory Interactions to carry out subsection 2303(d) from the funds authorized in subsection 2304(a), subsection 2304(i) authorizes $1.0 million for FY 2002, $1.1 million for FY 2003, $1.2 million for FY 2004, and $1.3 million for each of FY 2005 and FY 2006.
TITLE III—NUCLEAR ENERGY
Subtitle B—Advanced Fuel Recycling Technology Research and Development Program
Section 2321. Program.
Section 2321(a) requires the Secretary, through the Director of the Office, to conduct an advanced fuel recycling technology R&D program to further the availability of proliferation-resistant fuel recycling technologies as an alternative to aqueous reprocessing in support of evaluation of alternative national strategies for spent nuclear fuel and the Generation IV advanced reactor concepts, subject to annual review by the Secretary's Nuclear Energy Research Advisory Committee or other independent entity, as appropriate.
Section 2321(b) requires the Secretary to report on the activities of the advanced fuel recycling technology R&D program as part of the Department's annual budget submission.
Section 2321(c) authorizes: (1) $10.0 million for FY 2002, and (2) such sums as are necessary for FY 2003 and FY 2004.
Page 140 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
TITLE III—NUCLEAR ENERGY
Subtitle C—Department of Energy Authorization of Appropriations
Section 2341. Nuclear Energy Research Initiative.
Subsection 2341(a) requires the Secretary, through the Office, to conduct a Nuclear Energy Research Initiative for grants to be competitively awarded and subject to peer review for research relating to nuclear energy.
Subsection 2341(b) mandates that the program be directed toward accomplishing the objectives of: (1) developing advanced concepts and scientific breakthroughs in nuclear fission and reactor technology to address and overcome the principal technical and scientific obstacles to the expanded use of nuclear energy in the United States; (2) advancing the state of nuclear technology to maintain a competitive position in foreign markets and a future domestic market; (3) promoting and maintaining a United States nuclear science and engineering infrastructure to meet future technical challenges; (4) providing an effective means to collaborate on a cost-shared basis with international agencies and research organizations to address and influence nuclear technology development worldwide; and (5) promoting United States leadership and partnerships in bilateral and multilateral nuclear energy research.
Subsection 2341(c) authorizes to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section: (1) $60.0 million for FY 2002; and (2) such sums as are necessary for FY 2003 and FY 2004.
Page 141 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2342. Nuclear Energy Plant Optimization Program.
Subsection 2342(a) requires the Secretary to conduct a Nuclear Energy Plant Optimization R&D program jointly with industry and cost-shared by industry by at least 50 percent and subject to annual review by the Secretary's Nuclear Energy Research Advisory Committee or other independent entity, as appropriate.
Subsection 2342(b) states the program shall be directed toward accomplishing the following technical objectives: (1) managing long-term effects of component aging; and (2) improving efficiency and productivity of existing nuclear power stations.
Subsection 2342(c) authorizes to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section: (1) $15.0 million for FY 2002; and (2) such sums as are necessary for FY 2003 and FY 2004.
Section 2343. Nuclear Energy Technologies.
Subsection 2343(a) requires the Secretary to conduct a study of Generation IV nuclear energy systems, including development of a technology roadmap and performance of R&D necessary to make an informed technical decision regarding the most promising candidates for commercial application.
Under subsection 2343(b), to the extent practicable, in conducting the study under subsection 2343(a), the Secretary shall study nuclear energy systems that offer the highest probability of achieving the goals for Generation IV nuclear energy systems, including: (1) economics competitive with any other generators; (2) enhanced safety features, including passive safety features; (3) substantially reduced production of high-level waste, as compared with the quantity of waste produced by reactors in operation on the date of enactment of this Act; (4) highly proliferation-resistant fuel and waste; (5) sustainable energy generation including optimized fuel utilization; and (6) substantially improved thermal efficiency, as compared with the thermal efficiency of reactors in operation on the date of enactment of this Act.
Page 142 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
In preparing the study under subsection 2343(b), subsection 2343(c) requires the Secretary to consult with appropriate representatives of industry, institutions of higher education, Federal agencies, and international, professional and technical organizations.
Subsection 2343(d) requires that, not later than December 31, 2002, the Secretary shall transmit to the appropriate congressional committees a report describing the activities of the Secretary under this section, and plans for R&D leading to a public/private cooperative demonstration of one or more Generation IV nuclear energy systems. The report shall contain: (A) an assessment of all available technologies; (B) a summary of actions needed for the most promising candidates to be considered as viable commercial options within the five to ten years after the date of the report, with consideration of regulatory, economic, and technical issues; (C) a recommendation of not more than three promising Generation IV nuclear energy system concepts for further development; (D) an evaluation of opportunities for public/private partnerships; (E) a recommendation for the structure of a public/private partnership to share in development and construction costs; (F) a plan leading to the selection and conceptual design, by September 30, 2004, of at least one Generation IV nuclear energy system concept recommended under subparagraph (C) for demonstration through a public/private partnership; (G) an evaluation of opportunities for siting demonstration facilities on DOE land; and (H) a recommendation for appropriate involvement of other Federal agencies.
Subsection 2343(e) authorizes to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section: (1) $20.0 million for FY 2002; and (2) such sums as are necessary for FY 2003 and FY 2004.
Page 143 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2344. Authorization of Appropriations.
Subsection 2344(a) authorizes activities under this title for nuclear energy operation and maintenance, including amounts authorized under sections 2304(a) (University Nuclear Science and Engineering), 2321(c) (Advanced Fuel Recycling Technology R&D Program), 2341(c) (Nuclear Energy Research Initiative), 2342(c) (Nuclear Energy Plant Optimization Program), and 2343(e) (Nuclear Energy Technologies), and including Advanced Radioisotope Power Systems, Test Reactor Landlord, and Program Direction, $191.2 million for FY 2002, $199.0 million for FY 2003, and $207.0 million for FY 2004, to remain available until expended.
Subsection 2344(b) authorizes:
(1) $0.95 million for FY 2002, $2.2 million for FY 2003, $1.246 million for FY 2004, and $1.699 million for FY 2005 for completion of construction of Project 99–E–200, Test Reactor Area (TRA) Electric Utility Upgrade, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL); and
(2) $0.5 million for each of FY 2002 through FY 2005 for completion of construction of Project 95–E–201, TRA Fire and Life Safety Improvements, INEEL.
Subsection 2344(c) provides that none of the funds authorized to be appropriated in subsection 2481(a) may be used for: ''(1) Nuclear Energy Isotope Support and Production; (2) Argonne National Laboratory-West Operations; (3) Fast Flux Test Facility; or (4) Nuclear Facilities Management.'' These limitations are included to preserve the Science Committee's sole jurisdiction over the bill since the jurisdiction of programs under this subsection either resides with the Committee on Energy and Commerce or is shared with that Committee.
Page 144 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
TITLE IV—FOSSIL ENERGY
Subtitle A—Coal
Section 2401. Coal and Related Technologies Programs.
Subsection 2401(a) authorizes to be appropriated to the Secretary $172.0 million for FY 2002, $179.0 million for FY 2003, and $186.0 million for FY 2004, to remain available until expended, for other coal and related technologies programs, which shall include: (1) Innovations for Existing Plants; (2) Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle; (3) advanced combustion systems; (4) Turbines; (5) Sequestration Research and Development; (6) innovative technologies for demonstration; (7) Transportation Fuels and Chemicals; (8) Solid Fuels and Feedstocks; (9) Advanced Fuels Research; and (10) Advanced Research.
Notwithstanding subsection 2401(a), subsection 2405(b) prohibits the use of funds to carry out the activities authorized by this subtitle after September 30, 2002, unless the Secretary has transmitted to the appropriate congressional committees the report required by this subsection and one month have elapsed since that transmission. The report must include a plan containing: (1) a detailed description of how proposals will be solicited and evaluated, including a list of all activities expected to be undertaken; (2) a detailed list of technical milestones for each coal and related technology that will be pursued; and (3) a description of how the programs authorized in this section will be carried out so as to complement and not duplicate activities authorized under division E (Clean Coal Power Initiative).
Page 145 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
TITLE IV—FOSSIL ENERGY
Subtitle B—Oil and Gas
Section 2421. Petroleum-Oil Technology.
Section 2421 directs the Secretary to conduct a RD&D and commercial application program on petroleum-oil technology. The programs shall address: (1) Exploration and Production Supporting Research; (2) Oil Technology Reservoir Management/Extension; and (3) Effective Environmental Protection.
Section 2422. Gas.
Section 2422 directs the Secretary to conduct a program of RD&D and commercial application on natural gas technologies. The program shall address: (1) Exploration and Production; (2) Infrastructure; and (3) Effective Environmental Protection.
TITLE IV—FOSSIL ENERGY
Subtitle C—Ultra-Deepwater and Unconventional Drilling
Section 2441. Short Title.
Section 2441 cites the subtitle as the ''Natural Gas and Other Petroleum Research, Development, and Demonstration Act of 2001.''
Page 146 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2442. Definitions.
Section 2442 defines six terms, including the terms ''deepwater'' to mean water depths greater than 200 meters but less than 1,500 meters, ''ultra-deepwater'' to mean water depths greater than 1,500 meters, and ''unconventional'' to mean located in heretofore inaccessible or uneconomic formations on land.
Section 2443. Ultra-Deepwater Program.
Section 2443 requires the Secretary to establish a program of RD&D of ultra-deepwater natural gas and other petroleum exploration and production technologies, in areas currently available for Outer Continental Shelf leasing. The program shall be carried out by the Research Organization as provided in this subtitle.
Section 2444. National Energy Technology Laboratory.
The National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), when appropriate, shall carry out programs of long-term research into new natural gas and other petroleum exploration and production technologies and environmental mitigation technologies for production from unconventional and ultra-deepwater resources, including methane hydrates. NETL shall conduct a program of RD&D of new technologies for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from unconventional and ultra-deepwater natural gas or other petroleum exploration and production activities, including sub-sea floor carbon sequestration technologies.
Page 147 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2445. Advisory Committee.
Within six months after the date of the enactment of this Act, subsection 2445(a) requires the Secretary to establish an Advisory Committee consisting of seven members, each having extensive operational knowledge of and experience in the natural gas and other petroleum exploration and production industry who are not Federal Government employees or contractors. A minimum of four members shall have extensive knowledge of ultra-deepwater natural gas or other petroleum exploration and production technologies, a minimum of two members shall have extensive knowledge of unconventional natural gas or other petroleum exploration and production technologies, and at least one member shall have extensive knowledge of greenhouse gas emission reduction technologies, including carbon sequestration.
Subsection 2445(b) defines the function of the Advisory Committee to be to advise the Secretary on the selection of an organization to create the Research Organization and on the implementation of this subtitle.
Under subsection 2445(c), members of the Advisory Committee shall serve without compensation but shall receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, in accordance with applicable provisions under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code.
Subsection 2445(d) provides that the costs of activities carried out by the Secretary and the Advisory Committee under this subtitle shall be paid or reimbursed from the Fund established in section 2450.
Page 148 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Under subsection 2455(e), Section 14 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act shall not apply to the Advisory Committee.
Section 2446. Research Organization.
Subsection 2446(a) requires the Secretary, within six months after the date of the enactment of this Act, to solicit proposals from eligible entities for the creation of the Research Organization, and within three months after such solicitation, to select an entity to create the Research Organization.
Under subsection 2446(b), entities eligible to create the Research Organization shall: (1) have been in existence as of the date of the enactment of this Act; (2) be entities exempt from tax under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; and (3) be experienced in planning and managing programs in natural gas or other petroleum exploration and production RD&D.
Subsection 24246(c) requires that a proposal from an entity seeking to create the Research Organization shall include a detailed description of the proposed membership and structure of the Research Organization.
The functions of the Research Organization, as defined in subsection 2446(c) are to: (1) award grants on a competitive basis to qualified research institutions, institutions of higher education, companies, and consortia of same for the purpose of conducting RD&D of unconventional and ultra-deepwater natural gas or other petroleum exploration and production technologies; and (2) review activities under those grants to ensure that they comply with the requirements of this subtitle and serve the purposes for which the grants were made.
Page 149 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2447. Grants.
Subsection 2447(a) provides for three types of grants: (1) unconventional, for RD&D of technologies aimed at unconventional reservoirs; (2) ultra-deepwater, for R&D of technologies aimed at ultra-deepwater areas; and (3) ultra-deepwater architecture. In the case of ultra-deepwater architecture, the Research Organization shall award a grant to one or more consortia for the purpose of developing and demonstrating the next generation architecture for ultra-deepwater production of natural gas and other petroleum.
Subsection 2447(b) provides that grants under this section shall contain seven specific conditions:
1. If the grant recipient consists of more than one entity, the recipient shall provide a signed contract agreed to by all participating members clearly defining all rights to intellectual property for existing technology and for future inventions conceived and developed using funds provided under the grant, in a manner that is consistent with applicable laws.
2. There shall be a repayment schedule for Federal dollars provided for demonstration projects under the grant in the event of a successful commercialization of the demonstrated technology. Such repayment schedule shall provide that the payments are made to the Secretary with the express intent that these payments not impede the adoption of the demonstrated technology in the marketplace. In the event that such impedance occurs due to market forces or other factors, the Research Organization shall renegotiate the grant agreement so that the acceptance of the technology in the marketplace is enabled.
Page 150 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
3. Applications for grants for demonstration projects shall clearly state the intended commercial applications of the technology demonstrated.
4. The total amount of funds made available under a grant provided under subsection 2447(a)(3) for ultra-deepwater architecture shall not exceed 50 percent of the total cost of the activities for which the grant is provided.
5. The total amount of funds made available under a grant provided either under subsection 2447(a)(1) for unconventional reservoirs or under subsection 2447(a)(2) for ultra-deepwater areas shall not exceed 50 percent of the total cost of the activities covered by the grant, except that the Research Organization may elect to provide grants covering a higher percentage, not to exceed 90 percent, of total project costs in the case of grants made solely to independent producers.
6. An appropriate amount of funds provided under a grant shall be used for the broad dissemination of technologies developed under the grant to interested institutions of higher education, industry, and appropriate Federal and State technology entities to ensure the greatest possible benefits for the public and use of government resources.
7. Demonstrations of ultra-deepwater technologies for which funds are provided under a grant may be conducted in ultra-deepwater or deepwater locations.
Subsection 2447(c) requires that funds available for grants under this subtitle be allocated as follows: (1) 15 percent shall be for grants under subsection 2447(a)(1) for unconventional reservoirs; (2) 15 percent shall be for grants under subsection 2447(a)(2) for ultra-deepwater areas; (3) 60 percent shall be for grants under subsection 2447(a)(3) for ultra-deepwater architecture; and (4) 10 percent shall be for the NETL and the USGS, when appropriate, for carrying out section 2444.
Page 151 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2448. Plan and Funding.
Subsection 2448(a) requires the Research Organization to transmit to the Secretary an annual plan proposing projects and funding of activities under each paragraph of section 2447(a).
Under subsection 2448(b), the Secretary shall have one month to review the annual plan, and shall approve the plan, if it is consistent with this subtitle. If the Secretary approves the plan, the Secretary shall provide funding as proposed in the plan. If the Secretary does not approve the plan, subsection 2448(c) provides that the Secretary shall notify the Research Organization of the reasons for disapproval and shall withhold funding until a new plan is submitted which the Secretary approves. Within one month after notifying the Research Organization of a disapproval, the Secretary shall notify the appropriate congressional committees of the disapproval.
Section 2449. Audit.
Section 2449 requires the Secretary to retain an independent, commercial auditor to determine the extent to which the funds authorized by this subtitle have been expended in a manner consistent with the purposes of this subtitle. The auditor must transmit a report annually to the Secretary, who shall transmit the report to the appropriate congressional committees, along with a plan to remedy any deficiencies cited in the report.
Section 2450. Fund.
Page 152 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2450(a) establishes a fund to be known as the ''Ultra-Deepwater and Unconventional Gas Research Fund'' (Fund) in the United States Treasury (Treasury), which shall be available for obligation to the extent provided in advance in appropriations Acts for allocation under section 2447(c) above.
Subsection 2450(b) specifies the Fund's three funding sources:
1. Loans from the Treasury—Subsection 2450(b)(1) authorizes to be appropriated to the Secretary $900.0 million for the period encompassing FY 2002 through FY 2009. Such amounts shall be deposited by the Secretary in the Fund, and shall be considered loans from the Treasury. Income received by the United States in connection with any ultra-deepwater oil and gas leases shall be deposited in the Treasury and considered as repayment for the loans under this paragraph.
2. Additional Appropriations—Subsection 2450(b)(2) authorizes to be appropriated to the Secretary such sums as may be necessary for FY 2002 through FY 2009, to be deposited in the Fund.
3. Oil and Gas Lease Income—To the extent provided in advance in appropriations Acts, not more than 7.5 percent of the income of the United States from Federal oil and gas leases may be deposited in the Fund for FY 2002 through FY 2009. The Congressional Budget Office estimates these amounts to total $3.616 billion.
Section 2451. Sunset.
Under section 2451, no funds are authorized to be appropriated for carrying out this subtitle after FY 2009, and the Research Organization is terminated when it has expended all funds made available pursuant to this subtitle.
Page 153 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
TITLE IV—FOSSIL ENERGY
Subtitle D—Fuel Cells
Section 2461. Fuel Cells.
Section 2461(a) requires the Secretary to conduct a program of research, development, RD&D and commercial application on fuel cells. The program shall address: (1) Advanced Research; (2) Systems Development; (3) Vision 21–Hybrids; and (4) Innovative Concepts.
In addition to the program under subsection 2461(a), subsection 2461(b) requires the Secretary, in consultation other Federal agencies, as appropriate, to establish a program for the demonstration of fuel cell technologies, including fuel cell proton exchange membrane technology, for commercial, residential, and transportation applications. The program shall specifically focus on promoting the application of and improved manufacturing production and processes for fuel cell technologies.
Under subsection 2461(c), within the amounts authorized to be appropriated under subsection 2481(a), there are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary for the purpose of carrying out subsection 2461(b) $28.0 million for each of FY 2002, 2003, and 2004.
TITLE IV—FOSSIL ENERGY
Page 154 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subtitle E—DOE Authorization of Appropriations
Section 2481. Authorization of Appropriations.
Subsection 2481(a) authorizes appropriations for subtitle B (Oil and Gas) and subtitle D (Fuel Cells), and for Fossil Energy Research and Development Headquarters Program Direction, Field Program Direction, Plant and Capital Equipment, Cooperative Research and Development, Import/Export Authorization, and Advanced Metallurgical Processes $282.0 million for FY 2002, $293.0 million for FY 2003, and $305.0 million for FY 2004.
Subsection 2481(b) provides that none of the funds authorized to be appropriated in subsection 2481(a) may be used for: ''(1) Gas Hydrates; (2) Fossil Energy Environmental Restoration; or (3) RD&D and commercial application on coal and related technologies, including activities under subtitle A.'' The first limitation is imposed because the Methane Hydrate Act of 2000 has been recently enacted and has its own separate authorization. The second limitation is included to preserve the Science Committee's sole jurisdiction over the bill, since the jurisdiction of Fossil Energy Environmental Restoration is shared with the Committee on Energy and Commerce. The third limitation is imposed to limit the amount of coal funding to that contained in subtitle A.
TITLE V—SCIENCE
Subtitle A—Fusion Energy Sciences
Section 2501. Short Title.
Page 155 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2501 cites the subtitle as the ''Fusion Energy Sciences Act of 2001.''
Section 2502. Findings.
Section 2502 lists nine findings.
Section 2503. Plan for Fusion Experiment.
Subsection 2503(a) requires the Secretary, in full consultation with the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee and the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board as appropriate, to develop a plan for construction in the United States of a magnetic fusion burning plasma experiment for the purpose of accelerating scientific understanding of fusion plasmas. The Secretary shall request a review of the plan by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), and shall transmit the Department plan and the NAS review to the Congress by July 1, 2004.
Subsection 2503(b) requires the plan to: (1) address key burning plasma physics issues; and (2) include specific information on the scientific capabilities of the proposed experiment, the relevance of these capabilities to the goal of practical fusion energy, and the overall design of the experiment including its estimated cost and identifying potential construction sites.
Subsection 2503(c) authorizes the Secretary, in full consultation with the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee and the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board as appropriate, to develop a plan for the United States participation in an international burning plasma experiment for the purpose of accelerating scientific understanding of fusion plasmas, whose construction is found by the Secretary to be highly likely and where the United States participation is cost effective relative to the cost and scientific benefits of a domestic experiment described in subsection 2503(a). If the Secretary elects to develop a plan under this subsection, the Secretary shall include the information described in subsection 2503(b), and an estimate of the cost of United States participation in such an international experiment. The Secretary shall request a review by the NAS of any such plan, shall transmit the plan and the review to the Congress by July 1, 2004.
Page 156 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2503(d) authorizes the Secretary, through the Department's Fusion Energy Sciences Program, to conduct any R&D necessary to fully develop the plans described in this section.
Section 2504. Plan for Fusion Energy Sciences Program.
Section 2504 requires that within six months after the enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in full consultation with the Fusion Energy Sciences Advisory Committee, to develop and transmit to the Congress a plan for the purpose of ensuring a strong scientific base for the Fusion Energy Sciences Program and to enable the burning plasma experiment described in section 2503. Such plan shall ensure: (1) that existing fusion research facilities and equipment are more fully utilized with appropriate measurements and control tools; (2) a strengthened fusion science theory and computational base; (3) that the selection of and funding for new magnetic and inertial fusion research facilities is based on scientific innovation and cost effectiveness; (4) improvement in the communication of scientific results and methods between the fusion science community and the wider scientific community; (5) that adequate support is provided to optimize the design of the magnetic fusion burning plasma experiment referred to in section 2503; (6) that inertial confinement fusion facilities are utilized to the extent practicable for the purpose of inertial fusion energy R&D; (7) the development of a roadmap for a fusion-based energy source that shows the important scientific questions, the evolution of confinement configurations, the relation between these two features, and their relation to the fusion energy goal; (8) the establishment of several new centers of excellence, selected through a competitive peer-review process and devoted to exploring the frontiers of fusion science; (9) that the NSF, and other agencies, as appropriate, play a role in extending the reach of fusion science and in sponsoring general plasma science; and (10) that there be continuing broad assessments of the outlook for fusion energy and periodic external reviews of fusion energy sciences.
Page 157 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2505. Authorization of Appropriations.
Section 2505 authorizes—for ongoing activities in Department's Fusion Energy Sciences Program and for the purpose of planning activities under section 2503, but not for implementation of such plans—$320.0 million for FY 2002 and $335.0 million for FY 2003 of which up to $15 million for each of FY 2002 and FY 2003 may be used to establish several new centers of excellence under section 2504(8).
TITLE V—SCIENCE
Subtitle B—Spallation Neutron Source
Section 2521. Definition.
Section 2521 defines the term ''Spallation Neutron Source'' to mean Department Project 99–E–334, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
Section 2522. Authorization of Appropriations.
Subsection 2522(a) authorizes to be appropriated to the Secretary for construction of the Spallation Neutron Source (SNS): (1) $276.3 million for FY 2002, (2) $210.571 million for FY 2003, (3) $124.6 million for FY 2004, (4) $79.8 million for FY 2005, and (5) $41.1 million for FY 2006 for completion of construction.
Page 158 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2522(b) authorizes appropriation for other SNS project costs (including R&D necessary to complete the project, preoperations costs, and capital equipment not related to construction) $15.353 million for FY 2002 and $103.279 million for FY 2003 through 2006, to remain available until expended through September 30, 2006.
Section 2523. Report.
Section 2523 requires the Secretary to report on the SNS as part of Department's annual budget submission, including a description of the achievement of milestones, a comparison of actual costs to estimated costs, and any changes in estimated project costs or schedule.
Section 2524. Limitations.
Section 2524 limits the total amount obligated for the SNS by the Department, including prior year appropriations, to not more than: (1) $1,192.7 million for costs of construction; (2) $219.0 million for other project costs; and (3) $1,411.7 million for total project cost.
TITLE V—SCIENCE
Subtitle C—Facilities, Infrastructure, and User Facilities
Section 2541. Definition.
Page 159 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2541(1) defines the term ''nonmilitary energy laboratory'' to mean: (A) Ames Laboratory; (B) Argonne National Laboratory; (C) Brookhaven National Laboratory; (D) Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory; (E) Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; (F) Oak Ridge National Laboratory; (G) Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; (H) Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory; (I) Stanford Linear Accelerator Center; (J) Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility; or (K) any other facility of the Department that the Secretary, in consultation with the Director, Office of Science and the appropriate congressional committees, determines to be consistent with the mission of the Office of Science.
Subsection 2541(2) defines the term ''user facility'' to mean: (A) an Office of Science facility at a nonmilitary energy laboratory that provides special scientific and research capabilities, including technical expertise and support as appropriate, to serve the research needs of the Nation's universities, industry, private laboratories, Federal laboratories, and others, including research institutions or individuals from other nations where reciprocal accommodations are provided to United States research institutions and individuals or where the Secretary considers such accommodation to be in the national interest; and (B) any other Office of Science funded facility designated by the Secretary as a user facility.
Section 2542. Facility and Infrastructure Support for Nonmilitary Energy Laboratories.
Subsection 2542(a) requires the Secretary to develop and implement a least-cost nonmilitary energy laboratory facility and infrastructure strategy for: (1) maintaining existing facilities and infrastructure, as needed; (2) closing unneeded facilities; (3) making facility modifications; and (4) building new facilities.
Page 160 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2542(b) requires the Secretary to prepare a comprehensive ten-year plan for conducting future facility maintenance, making repairs, modifications, and new additions, and constructing new facilities at each nonmilitary energy laboratory. Such plan is to provide for facilities work in accordance with the following priorities: (1) providing for the safety and health of employees, visitors, and the general public with regard to correcting existing structural, mechanical, electrical, and environmental deficiencies; (2) providing for the repair and rehabilitation of existing facilities to keep them in use and prevent deterioration, if feasible; and (3) providing engineering design and construction services for those facilities that require modification or additions in order to meet the needs of new or expanded programs.
Subsection 2542(c) requires the Secretary to prepare and transmit to the appropriate congressional committees a report containing the plan prepared under subsection 2542(b) within one year after the date of the enactment of this Act. For each nonmilitary energy laboratory, the report is to contain: (1) the current priority list of proposed facilities and infrastructure projects, including cost and schedule requirements; (2) a current ten-year plan that demonstrates the reconfiguration of its facilities and infrastructure to meet its missions and to address its long-term operational costs and return on investment; (3) the total current budget for all facilities and infrastructure funding; and (4) the current status of each facilities and infrastructure project compared to the original baseline cost, schedule, and scope.
The report shall also: (1) include a plan for new facilities and facility modifications at each nonmilitary energy laboratory that will be required to meet the Department's changing missions for the twenty-first century, including schedules and estimates for implementation, and including a section outlining long-term funding requirements consistent with anticipated budgets and annual authorization of appropriations; (2) address the coordination of modernization and consolidation of facilities among the nonmilitary energy laboratories in order to meet changing mission requirements; and (3) provide for annual reports to the appropriate congressional committees on accomplishments, conformance to schedules, commitments, and expenditures.
Page 161 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2543. User Facilities.
Under subsection 2543(a), when the Department makes a user facility available to universities and other potential users, or seeks input from universities and other potential users regarding significant characteristics or equipment in a user facility or a proposed user facility, the Department shall ensure broad public notice of such availability or such need for input to universities and other potential users.
Subsection 2543(b) requires the Department to employ full and open competition in selecting participants when the Department considers the participation of a university or other potential user in the establishment or operation of a user facility.
Section 2543(c) prohibits the Department from redesignating a user facility, as defined by section 2541(b) as something other than a user facility to avoid the requirements of subsections (a) and (b).
TITLE V—SCIENCE
Subtitle D—Advisory Panel on Office of Science
Section 2561. Establishment.
Section 2561 requires the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, in consultation with the Secretary, to establish an Advisory Panel on the Office of Science comprised of knowledgeable individuals to: (1) address concerns about the current status and the future of scientific research supported by the Office; (2) examine alternatives to the current organizational structure of the Office within the Department, taking into consideration existing structures for the support of scientific research in other Federal agencies and the private sector; and (3) suggest actions to strengthen the scientific research supported by the Office that might be taken jointly by the Department and Congress.
Page 162 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2562. Report.
Under section 2562, within six months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Advisory Panel shall transmit its findings and recommendations in a report to the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the Secretary. The Director and the Secretary shall jointly: (1) consider each of the Panel's findings and recommendations, and comment on each as they consider appropriate; and (2) transmit the Panel's report and the comments of the Director and the Secretary on the report to the appropriate congressional committees within nine months after the date of the enactment of this Act.
TITLE V—SCIENCE
Subtitle E—Department of Energy Authorization of Appropriations
Section 2581. Authorization of Appropriations.
Including the amounts authorized to be appropriated for FY 2002 under section 2505 for Fusion Energy Sciences and under subsection 2522(b) for the SNS, subsection 2581(a) authorizes to be appropriated to the Secretary for the Office of Science (also including subtitle C–Facilities, Infrastructure, and User Facilities, High Energy Physics, Nuclear Physics, Biological and Environmental Research, Basic Energy Sciences (except for the SNS authorization under subsection 2522(b) ), Advanced Scientific Computing Research, Energy Research Analysis, Multiprogram Energy Laboratories-Facilities Support, Facilities and Infrastructure, Safeguards and Security, and Program Direction) operation and maintenance $3,299.558 million for FY year 2002, to remain available until expended.
Page 163 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2581(b) provides that within the amounts authorized under subsection (a), $5.0 million for FY 2002 may be used to carry out research in the use of precious metals (excluding platinum, palladium, and rhodium) in catalysis, either directly though national laboratories, or through the award of grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts with public or nonprofit entities.
Subsection 2581(c) provides that in addition to the amounts authorized under subsection 2522(a) for SNS construction, subsection 2581(b) authorizes:
(1) $11.4 million for FY 2002 for completion of construction of Project 98–G–304, Neutrinos at the Main Injector, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory;
(2) $11.405 million for FY 2002 for completion of construction of Project 01–E–300, Laboratory for Comparative and Functional Genomics, Oak Ridge National Laboratory;
(3) $4.0 million for FY 2002, $8.0 million for FY 2003, and $2.0 million for FY 2004 for completion of construction of Project 02–SC–002, Project Engineering Design (PED), Various Locations;
(4) $3.183 million for FY 2002 for completion of construction of Project 02–SC–002, Multiprogram Energy Laboratories Infrastructure Project Engineering Design (PED), Various Locations; and
Page 164 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
(5) $18.633 million for FY 2002 and $13.029 million for FY 2003 for completion of construction of Project MEL–001, Multiprogram Energy Laboratories, Infrastructure, Various Locations.
Subsection 2581(d) provides that none of the funds authorized to be appropriated in subsection 2581(b) may be used for construction at any national security laboratory as defined in section 3281(1) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000 (50 U.S.C. 2471(1) ) or at any nuclear weapons production facility as defined in section 3281(2) of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2000 (50 U.S.C. 2471(2) ). This limitation is included to preserve the Science Committee's sole jurisdiction over the bill, since the jurisdiction of these laboratories and facilities reside with the Committee on Armed Services.
TITLE VI—MISCELLANEOUS
Subtitle A—General Provisions for the Department of Energy
Section 2601. Research, Development, Demonstration and Commercial Application of Energy Technology Programs, Projects, and Activities.
Subsection 2601(a) requires that RD&D and commercial application programs, projects, and activities authorized under this Act be carried out under the procedures of the Federal Nonnuclear Energy Research and Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5901 et seq.), the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.), or any other Act under which the Secretary is authorized to carry out such programs, projects, and activities, only to the extent the Secretary is authorized to carry out such activities under each Act and except as otherwise provided in this Act.
Page 165 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2601(b) authorizes the Secretary to use grants, joint ventures, and any other form of agreement available to the Secretary to the extent authorized under applicable provisions of law, contracts, cooperative agreements, cooperative R&D agreements under the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3701 et seq.), except as otherwise provided in this Act, to carry out RD&D and commercial application programs, projects, and activities.
Subsection 2601(c) defines the term ''joint venture'' for the purpose of this section to have the meaning given that term under section 2 of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993 (15 U.S.C. 4301), except that such term applies to RD&D and commercial application of energy technology joint ventures.
Subsection 2601(d) requires that section 12(c)(7) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3710a(c)(7) ), relating to the protection of information, will apply to RD&D and commercial application of energy technology programs, projects, and activities under this Act.
Under subsection 2601(e), an invention conceived and developed by any person using funds provided through a grant under this Act shall be considered a subject invention for the purposes of chapter 18 of title 35, United States Code (commonly referred to as the Bayh-Dole Act).
Subsection 2601(f) requires the Secretary to ensure that each program authorized by this Act includes an outreach component to provide information, as appropriate, to manufacturers, consumers, engineers, architects, builders, energy service companies, universities, facility planners and managers, State and local governments, and other entities.
Page 166 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2601(g) requires the Secretary to provide guidelines and procedures for the transition of energy technologies from research through development and demonstration to commercial application of energy technology where appropriate. Nothing in this section precludes the Secretary from: (1) entering into a contract, cooperative agreement, cooperative R&D agreement under the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3701 et seq.), grant, joint venture, or any other form of agreement available to the Secretary under this section that relates to RD&D and commercial application of energy technology; or (2) extending a contract, cooperative agreement, cooperative R&D agreement under the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980, grant, joint venture, or any other form of agreement available to the Secretary that relates to RD&D to cover commercial application of energy technology.
Subsection 2601(h) states that this section shall not apply to any contract, cooperative agreement, cooperative R&D agreement under the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3701 et seq.), grant, joint venture, or any other form of agreement available to the Secretary that is in effect as of the date of enactment of this Act.
Section 2602. Limits on Use of Funds.
Subsection 2602(a) prohibits the use of funds authorized by this Act to award a management and operating contract for a federally owned or operated nonmilitary energy laboratory of the Department unless such contract is awarded using competitive procedures or the Secretary grants, on a case-by-case basis, a waiver to allow for such a deviation. The Secretary may not delegate the authority to grant such a waiver. At least 60 days before a contract award, amendment, or modification for which the Secretary intends to grant such a waiver, the Secretary shall submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report notifying the committees of the waiver and setting forth the reasons for the waiver.
Page 167 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2602(b) prohibits the Secretary from using funds to produce or provide articles or services for the purpose of selling the articles or services to a person outside the Federal Government, unless the Secretary determines that comparable articles or services are not available from a commercial source in the United States.
Subsection 2602(c) prohibits the Secretary from using funds to prepare or initiate Requests for Proposals for a program if Congress has not authorized the program.
Section 2603. Cost Sharing.
Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, subsection 2603(a) mandates that for R&D programs carried out under this subtitle, the Secretary shall require a commitment from non-Federal sources of at least 20 percent of the cost of the project. The Secretary may reduce or eliminate the non-Federal requirement under this subsection if the Secretary determines that the R&D is of a basic or fundamental nature.
Similarly, under subsection 2603(b) the Secretary shall require at least 50 percent of the costs directly and specifically related to any demonstration or commercial application project under this subtitle to be provided from non-Federal sources. The Secretary may reduce the non-Federal requirement under this subsection if the Secretary determines that the reduction is necessary and appropriate considering the technological risks involved in the project and is necessary to meet the objectives of this subtitle.
In calculating the amount of the non-Federal commitment under subsection (a) or (b), the Secretary may include personnel, services, equipment, and other resources.
Page 168 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2604. Limitations on Demonstrations and Commercial Application of Energy Technology.
Section 2604 requires the Secretary to provide funding only for scientific or energy demonstration and commercial application of energy technology programs, projects or activities for technologies or processes that can reasonably be expected to yield new, measurable benefits to the cost, efficiency, or performance of the technology or process.
Section 2605. Reprogramming.
Section 2605 prohibits the reprogramming of funds in excess of 105 percent of the amount authorized for a program, project, or activity, or in excess of $0.25 million above the amount authorized for the program, program, project, or activity until the Secretary submits a report to the appropriate congressional committees and a period of 30 days has elapsed after the date on which the report is received. The report shall be a full and complete statement of the proposed reprogramming and the facts and circumstances in support of the proposed reprogramming. This section prohibits the Secretary from obligating funds in excess of the total amount authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary by this Act and prohibits the Secretary from using funds for any use for which Congress has declined to authorize funds.
TITLE VI—MISCELLANEOUS
Subtitle B—Other Miscellaneous Provisions
Section 2611. Notice of Reorganization.
Page 169 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2611 requires the Secretary to provide notice to the appropriate congressional committees not later than 15 days before any reorganization of environmental research or development, scientific or energy research, development, or demonstration, or commercial application of energy technology program, project, or activity of the Department.
Section 2612. Limits on General Plant Projects.
Section 2612 requires the Secretary to halt the construction of a civilian environmental research, development, or demonstration, or commercial application of energy technology ''general plant project'' if the estimated cost of the project (including any revisions) exceeds $5.0 million unless the Secretary has furnished a complete report to the appropriate congressional committees explaining the project and the reasons for the estimate or revision.
Section 2613. Limits on Construction Projects.
Section 2613 prohibits construction on a civilian environmental R&D, scientific or energy RD&D, or commercial application of energy technology project for which funding has been specifically authorized by law to be initiated and continued if the estimated cost for the project exceeds 110 percent of the higher of: (1) the amount authorized for the project; or (2) the most recent total estimated cost presented to Congress as budget justification for such project. To exceed such limits, the Secretary must report in detail to the appropriate congressional committees on the related circumstances and the report must be before the appropriate congressional committees for 30 legislative days (excluding any day on which either House of Congress is not in session because of an adjournment of more than three days to a day certain). This section shall not apply to any construction project that has a current estimated cost of less than $5.0 million.
Page 170 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2614. Authority for Conceptual and Construction Design.
Section 2614 limits the Secretary's authority to request construction funding in excess of $5.0 million for a civilian environmental R&D, scientific or energy research, development, or demonstration, or commercial application of energy technology program, project, or activity until the Secretary has completed a conceptual design for that project. Furthermore, if the estimated cost of completing a conceptual design for the construction project exceeds $0.75 million, the Secretary must submit a request to Congress for funds for the conceptual design before submitting a request for the construction project. In addition, the subsection allows the Secretary to carry out construction design (including architectural and engineering services) in connection with any proposed construction project that is in support of a civilian environmental R&D, scientific or energy research, development, and demonstration, or commercial application of energy technology program, project, or activity of the Department if the total estimated cost for such design does not exceed $0.25 million; if the total estimated cost for construction design exceeds $0.25 million, funds for such design must be specifically authorized by law.
Section 2615. National Energy Policy Group Mandated Reports.
Subsection 2615(a) requires that upon completion of the Secretary's review of current funding and historic performance of the Department's energy efficiency, renewable energy, and alternative energy R&D programs in response to the recommendations of the May 16, 2001, Report of the National Energy Policy Development Group, the Secretary shall transmit a report containing the results of such review to the appropriate congressional committees.
Page 171 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 2615(b) requires that upon completion of the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology reviewing and making recommendations on using the Nation's energy resources more efficiently, in response to the recommendations of the May 16, 2001, Report of the National Energy Policy Development Group, the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall transmit a report containing the results of such review and recommendations to the appropriate congressional committees.
Section 2616. Independent Reviews and Assessments.
Section 2616 requires the Secretary to enter into appropriate arrangements with the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering to ensure that there be periodic reviews and assessments of the programs authorized by this Act, as well as the goals for such programs as established under section 2004. Such reviews and assessments shall be conducted at least every five years, and the Secretary shall transmit to the appropriate congressional committees reports containing the results of these reviews and assessments.
Division E: ''Clean Coal Power Initiative Act of 2001''
Section 5000. Short Title
Subsection 5000 cites the division as the ''Clean Coal Power Initiative Act of 2001.''
Section 5001. Findings.
Page 172 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 5001 contains eight findings.
Section 5002. Definitions.
Section 5003 defines the term ''cost and performance-based goals'' to mean the cost and performance-based goals established under section 5004, and the term ''Secretary'' to mean the Secretary of Energy.
Section 5003. Clean Coal Power Initiative.
Subsection 5003(a) requires the Secretary to carry out the Clean Coal Power Initiative under: (1) this division; (2) the Federal Nonnuclear Energy Research and Development Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C.5901 et seq.); (3) the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C.5801 et seq.); and (4) title XIII of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C.13331 et seq.), to achieve cost and performance goals established by the Secretary under section 5004.
Section 5004. Cost and Performance Goals.
Subsection 5004(a) requires the Secretary to perform an assessment that establishes measurable cost and performance goals for 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020 for the programs authorized by this division. Such assessment must be based on the latest scientific, economic, and technical knowledge.
In establishing the cost and performance goals, subsection 5004(b) requires the Secretary to consult with representatives of: (1) the United States coal industry; (2) State coal development agencies; (3) the electric utility industry; (4) railroads and other transportation industries; (5) manufacturers of advanced coal-based equipment; (6) institutions of higher learning, national laboratories, and professional and technical societies; (7) organizations representing workers; (8) organizations formed to—(A) promote the use of coal; (B) further the goals of environmental protection; and (C) promote the production and generation of coal-based power from advanced facilities; and (9) other appropriate Federal and State agencies.
Page 173 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Under subsection 5004(c), the Secretary shall: (1) not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this division, issue a set of draft cost and performance goals for public comment; and (2) not later than 180 days after the date of enactment, after taking into consideration any public comments received, submit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives, and to the Senate, the final cost and performance goals.
Section 5005. Authorization of Appropriations.
Except as provided in subsection 5005(c), subsection 5005(a) authorizes to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out the Clean Coal Power Initiative under section 5003 $200.0 million for each of the fiscal years 2002 through 2011, to remain available until expended.
Notwithstanding subsection 5005(a), subsection 5005(b) prohibits the use of funds to carry out the activities authorized by this division after September 30, 2002, unless the Secretary has transmitted to the to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives, and to the Senate, the report required by this subsection and one month has elapsed since that transmission. The report shall include, with respect to subsection 5005(a), a 10-year plan containing: (1) a detailed assessment of whether the aggregate funding levels provided under subsection 5005(a) are the appropriate funding levels for that program; (2) a detailed description of how proposals will be solicited and evaluated, including a list of all activities expected to be undertaken; (3) a detailed list of technical milestones for each coal and related technology that will be pursued; (4) recommendations for a mechanism for recoupment of Federal funding for successful commercial projects; and (5) a detailed description of how the program will avoid problems enumerated in General Accounting Office reports on the Clean Coal Technology Program, including problems that have resulted in unspent funds and projects that failed either financially or scientifically.
Page 174 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 5005(c) provides that subsection 5005(b) shall not apply to any project begun before September 30, 2002.
Section 5006. Project Criteria.
Subsection 5006(a) prohibits the Secretary from providing funding for project that does not advance efficiency, environmental performance, and cost competitiveness well beyond the level of technologies that are in operation or have been demonstrated as of the date of the enactment of this division.
Subsection 5006(b) contains the technical criteria for the Clean Coal Power Initiative.
Under subsection 5006(b)(1)(A), in allocating the funds authorized under section 5005(a), the Secretary shall ensure that at least 80 percent of the funds are used only for projects on coal-based gasification technologies, including gasification combined cycle, gasification fuel cells, gasification coproduction and hybrid gasification/combustion.
Subsection 5006(b)(1)(B) requires the Secretary to set technical milestones specifying emissions levels that coal gasification projects must be designed to and reasonably expected to achieve. The milestones shall get more restrictive through the life of the program, and such milestones shall be designed to achieve by 2020 coal gasification projects able to: (1) remove 99 percent of sulfur dioxide; (2) emit no more than 0.05 pounds (lbs) of nitrous oxides (NOX) per million British Thermal Unit (BTU); (3) achieve substantial reductions in mercury emissions; and (4) achieve a thermal efficiency of 60 percent (higher heating value).
Page 175 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
For projects not described in subsection 5006(b)(1)(A) or subsection 5006(b)(1)(B), subsection 5006(b)(2) requires the Secretary to set technical milestones specifying emissions levels that the projects must be designed to and reasonably expected to achieve. The milestones shall get more restrictive through the life of the program, and such milestones shall be designed to achieve by 2010 projects able to: (1) remove 97 percent of sulfur dioxide; (2) emit no more than 0.08 lbs of NOx per million BTU; (3) achieve substantial reductions in mercury emissions; and (4) achieve a thermal efficiency of 45 percent (higher heating value).
Subsection 5006(c) prohibits the Secretary from providing a funding award under this division unless the recipient of the award has documented to the satisfaction of the Secretary that: (1) the award recipient is financially viable without the receipt of additional Federal funding; (2) the recipient will provide sufficient information to the Secretary for the Secretary to ensure that the award funds are spent efficiently and effectively; and (3) a market exists for the technology being demonstrated or applied, as evidenced by statements of interest in writing from potential purchasers of the technology.
Subsection 5006(d) requires the Secretary to provide financial assistance to projects that meet the requirements of subsections 5006 (a), (b), and (c) and are likely to: (1) achieve overall cost reductions in the utilization of coal to generate useful forms of energy; (2) improve the competitiveness of coal among various forms of energy in order to maintain a diversity of fuel choices in the United States to meet electricity generation requirements; and (3) demonstrate methods and equipment that are applicable to 25 percent of the electricity generating facilities that use coal as the primary feedstock as of the date of enactment of this division.
Page 176 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Subsection 5006(e) limits the Federal share of the cost of a coal or related technology project funded by the Secretary to not more than 50 percent.
Subsection 5006(f) provides that neither the use of any particular technology, nor the achievement of any emission reduction, by any facility receiving assistance under this division shall be taken into account for purposes of making any determination under the Clean Air Act in applying the provisions of that Act to a facility not receiving assistance under this division, including any determination concerning new source performance standards, lowest achievable emission rate, best available control technology, or any other standard, requirement, or limitation.
Section 5007. Study.
Under subsection 5007(a), not later than one year after the date of enactment of this division, and once every two years thereafter through 2016, the Secretary, in cooperation with other appropriate Federal agencies, must transmit to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Science of the House of Representatives, and to the Senate, a report containing the results of a study to: (1) identify efforts (and the costs and periods of time associated with those efforts) that, by themselves or in combination with other efforts, may be capable of achieving the cost and performance goals; (2) develop recommendations for the Department of Energy to promote the efforts identified under (1); and (3) develop recommendations for additional authorities required to achieve the cost and performance goals.
In carrying out this section, subsection 5007(b) requires the Secretary shall give due weight to the expert advice of representatives of the entities described in subsection 5004(b).
Page 177 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 5008. Clean Coal Centers of Excellence.
As part of the Clean Coal Power Initiative authorized in section 5003, section 5008, which is included in the manager's amendment, requires the Secretary to award competitive, merit-based grants to universities for the establishment of Centers of Excellence for Energy Systems of the Future. Such centers shall be located at universities with a proven record of conducting research on, developing, or demonstrating clean coal technologies. The Secretary shall provide grants to universities that can show the greatest potential for demonstrating new clean coal technologies.
Legislative History
Representative W.J. (Billy) Tauzin, Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, introduced H.R. 4 on July 27, 2001. It was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and, in addition, to the Committees on Science, Ways and Means, Resources, Education and the Workforce, Transportation and Infrastructure, the Budget, and Financial Services. The Committee on Science held a markup of H.R. 4 on July 30, 2001 and discharged the bill on July 31, 2001, at which time the Committee on Rules filed H.Rept. 107–178 on H.Res. 216, providing for consideration of H.R. 4.
On August 2, 2001, the House agreed to H.Res. 216 by: Y–220, N–206 (Roll Call No. 307). On August 2, 2001, the House passed H.R. 4, as amended, by: Y–240, N–189 (Roll Call No. 320).
Page 178 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
The Senate passed H.R. 4 by: Y–88, N–11 (Roll Call No. 94) after striking all after the enacting clause and inserting the text of S. 517, the Senate companion measure, as amended. The Senate Amendment contained several titles and provisions falling within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Science, including provisions related to energy research, development and demonstration (Sections 513–516, 770–772, 807–809, 814, 816, 824, 832, Titles XII, Title XIV, Sections 1502, 1504–1505, Title XVII and Sections 1801–1805), indemnification of nuclear energy programs (Sections 501–507, and 509) and global climate change policy and science and technology (Sections 1001–1022 and Titles XI and XIII).
On May 1, 2002, the Senate requested a conference and appointed conferees.
The House disagreed with the Senate amendment to H.R. 4 and agreed to a conference. From the Committee on Science, the Speaker appointed Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert, Energy Subcommittee Chairman Roscoe Bartlett, and Committee Ranking Minority Member Ralph Hall, provided that Representative Woolsey be appointed in lieu of Rep. Hall for consideration of sections 2001–2178 and 2201–2261 of Division B of the House bill and modifications committed to conference.
The Conferees met on June 27, July 25, September 12, 19, 25 and 26, and October 2 and 3, of 2002 and reached agreement on a number of key provisions in the Conference. However, the Conferees were unable to resolve differences on the remainder of the bill and the legislation died with the adjournment of 107th Congress.
2.2—H.R. 64, To provide for the establishment of the position of Deputy Administrator for Science and Technology of the Environmental Protection Agency, and for other purposes
Page 179 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Background and Summary of Legislation
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for protecting the environment and public health through environmental regulation, enforcement, remediation, and voluntary programs. To carry out its mission, EPA is organized into thirteen 13 offices in Washington, D.C. and ten regional offices. Assistant Administrators (AA) head nine of the thirteen regulatory, science, and information offices. The AAs are of equal rank and report to the Deputy Administrator and the Administrator of the Agency.
Although EPA's mission is largely regulatory, it carries out a broad scientific research agenda to support regulatory decisions. The Office of Research and Development (ORD) is the scientific arm of the Agency primarily responsible for carrying out this agenda. ORD conducts intramural research and administers extramural research to support the Agency's decisions. However, the Agency's regulatory offices also conduct various research efforts on issues specific to their mission.
Expert panels commissioned by the EPA and Congress have reviewed the EPA's science programs and have recommended structural and management changes to strengthen the role science plays in the decision-making process. In 1992, an expert panel commissioned by EPA recommended that EPA should appoint a ''science advisor'' because the process of ensuring that policy decisions are informed by a clear understanding of the relevant science—is not well defined or coherently organized within the EPA.
In the 1995 Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Act, Congress directed EPA to obtain an independent review of the overall structure and management of EPA's research program and the Agency's scientific peer-review procedures. The National Academy of Sciences released four reports in response to this charge. The final report, ''Strengthening Science at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Research-Management and Peer-Review Practices,'' was released in June 2000 and serves as the basis for this legislation.
Page 180 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
According to the Academy report, a new Deputy for Science and Technology is needed to serve as an advocate for science within upper management at the Agency and is needed to coordinate research among the regulatory and scientific arms of the Agency. The authors argued that the new Deputy Administrator is needed because this person would (1) rank higher than the existing AAs, thereby fostering better research relationships between ORD and the Agency's regulatory offices; (2) provide central science-policy authority to administer the Agency's science work; (3) have the appropriate authority to ensure that the best possible peer-review and research-planning practices, and (4) elevate the role of science in the decision-making process. The Academy concluded, ''The importance of science in EPA decision-making process should be no less than that afforded to legal considerations.''
The report also recommended that the AA for ORD be turned into a six-year appointed position to help ensure greater continuity in long-term research programs. The tenure of an AA at ORD averages two to three years and is typically a lower priority appointment in new administrations, thereby undermining the stability needed to sustain a quality research program. According to the report, a longer tenure for the AA would help insulate the office during changes in the Administration, thereby providing more continuity for research conducted at the Agency.
The purpose of H.R. 64 is to establish a Deputy Administrator for Science and Technology at EPA, who would be given the title of Chief Scientist and appointed for a fixed term at EPA. It is intended to increase the political clout of science at the Agency while it decreases the political pressures on the AA for ORD.
Legislative History
Page 181 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Representative Vernon J. Ehlers, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards, introduced H.R. 64 on January 3, 2001. The bill was referred to the Science Committee on February 14, 2001. On March 29, 2001, the Environment, Technology, and Standards Subcommittee held a hearing on this bill.
The Subcommittee met on May 17, 2001, to consider the bill. Representative Ehlers and Subcommittee Ranking Minority Member James Barcia offered a manager's amendment, which was adopted by a voice vote. The manager's amendment clarified the role and duties of the new Deputy Administrator, reduced the Assistant Administrator's term from six years to five, and dropped a paragraph outlining ''the sense of Congress'' on how the Office of Research and Development should operate. The Subcommittee reported the bill, H.R. 64, as a single amendment in the nature of a substitute, by a voice vote.
On October 3, 2001, the Science Committee considered H.R. 64. Representative Sheila Jackson Lee offered an amendment to clarify the guidelines for the dissemination of research results. Representative Jackson Lee's amendment called for the guidelines to recognize historically black colleges and universities, Hispanic serving institutions, and other minority and rural communities. Chairman Boehlert offered a second-degree amendment to the amendment further clarifying the intent of Representative Jackson Lee's amendment, and it was adopted. The Committee then adopted Representative Jackson Lee's amendment, as amended. The Committee reported the bill as amended, by voice a vote.
On November 30, 2001, the Committee filed H.Rept. 107–311. On April 30, 2002, the House agreed to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 64, as amended, by a voice vote. The bill was received in the Senate and was referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works on May 1, 2002. No further action was taken in the Senate.
Page 182 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
2.3—H.R. 100, National Science Education Act
Background and Summary of Legislation
In 1945 when Dr. Vannevar Bush transmitted his landmark report, 'Science—the Endless Frontier,' he paraphrased Harvard President John Conant in making the case for the importance of a targeted investment in mathematics and science education as part of a national research policy:
In every section of the entire area where the word science may properly be applied, the limiting factor is a human one. We shall have rapid or slow advance in this direction or in that depending on the number of really first-class scientists who are engaged in the work in question. So in the last analysis, the future of science in this country will be determined by our basic educational policy.
This analysis is as true today as it was fifty years ago. Recent studies have shown that the most important factor in successful educational improvement efforts, especially those in science, math, engineering and technology, is the skill of enthusiastic and well-prepared teachers. When integrating the needs of learners into the context of the emerging needs of the American workplace and society, the truth of the observation 'teaching is the essential profession, the one that makes all other professions possible' is obvious. Teachers provide the essential connection between students and the content they are learning. A gifted and well-trained teacher can instill the excitement of scientific inquiry while anchoring the material in the context of everyday life.
Page 183 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Thus, high quality teachers must be identified, recruited, and retained in every school district throughout the Nation. K–12 science, mathematics, engineering, or technology teachers should be respected by their peers, rewarded financially and intellectually, and have sufficient opportunities for advancement. In exchange, we must expect that all teachers have mastered their content area, curricula, up-to-date research in teaching and learning, and techniques that can be used to connect information to the students in their classrooms.
The National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century concluded that the most efficient way to disseminate information about best practices and to improve the quality of professional development was to train a cadre of master teachers. These teachers, who must be well versed in the most effective teaching methods, have demonstrated the ability to obtain high student achievement, and be able to effectively use technology for teaching and learning, can assume responsibility for reviewing and modifying curriculum and developing and implementing professional development and mentoring programs for their peers. H.R. 100, the National Science Education Act (NSEA) responds to these recommendations and authorizes the Director of the National Science Foundation to establish a program to provide grants to universities to train master teachers and for other purposes designed to improve the instruction of elementary and secondary mathematics and science education.
Legislative History
Representative Vernon J. Ehlers, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards, introduced H.R. 100 on January 3, 2001. It was referred to the Committee on Science. On February 14, 2001 it was referred to the Subcommittee on Research. The Subcommittee on Research held a markup on June 7, 2001. Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute; to revise Section 4, the master teacher program, by authorizing grants to institutions of higher education for the purpose of training master teachers; to revise section 9, the distance learning grant program, by providing grants to higher education institutions for the implementation of K–12 distance learning programs; and to strike Section 3—Assurance of Continued Local Control, Section 7—Teacher Technology Professional Development, Section 10—Scholarships to Participate in Certain Research Activities, and Section 11—Interagency Coordination of Science Education Programs. The amendment was adopted by a voice vote. On June 13, 2001 the Committee on Science held a markup and ordered the measure reported, as amended, by a voice vote. The Committee filed H.Rept. 107–133, Pt. 1 on July 11, 2001. On July 30, 2001 the House agreed to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 100, as amended, by a voice vote. On July 31, 2001, H.R. 100 was received in the Senate and referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Provisions of H.R. 100 were incorporated into H.R. 4664, the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 which became P.L. 107–368.
Page 184 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
2.4—H.R. 524, Electronic Commerce Enhancement Act of 2001
Background and Summary of Legislation
H.R. 524 requires the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to establish an Advisory Panel to report to Congress on the challenges facing small and medium-sized manufacturers and other such businesses in integrating and utilizing electronic commerce technologies and business practices. The bill requires the final report to include: (1) a three-year planning document for NIST's Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) program in the field of electronic commerce; and (2) recommendations for NIST to address interoperability issues in electronic commerce.
The bill requires the MEP program to establish a pilot program to assist small and medium-sized manufacturers and businesses in integrating and utilizing electronic commerce technologies and business practices through a competitive grants program, and to design the program based on recommendations in the Panel's reports.
H.R. 524 also requires the Director of NIST to: (1) identify critical enterprise integration standards and implementation activities for major manufacturing industries; (2) report to Congress on such matters and anticipated related NIST activities for that fiscal year; and (3) submit to Congress a plan for enterprise integration for each major manufacturing industry. Requires annual plan updates for an industry until enterprise integration has been achieved.
Page 185 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
H.R. 524 was introduced in the House by Representative James Barcia, Ranking Minority Member of the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards, on February 8, 2001 and was referred to the Committee on Science. Under suspension of the rules, the bill passed on February 14, 2001 by: Y–409, N–6 (Roll Call No. 14). The measure was received in the Senate on the same day and was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. No further legislative action was taken in the Senate.
2.5—H.R. 1259, Computer Security Enhancement Act of 2001
Background and Summary of Legislation
Computer Security Enhancement Act of 2001—Amends the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act to require the Institute to provide assistance to Federal agencies in the protection of computer networks, promote Federal compliance with computer information security and privacy guidelines, and assist Federal response efforts to unauthorized access to Federal systems.
Section 4—Computer Security Implementation
Requires the Institute to develop uniform standards for the cost-effective security and privacy of sensitive information in certain Federal systems, provide a list of certified commercial computer system security products, and report annually on Federal computer system evaluations.
Page 186 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 5—Computer Security Review, Public Meetings, and Information
Directs the Institute to solicit Computer System Security and Privacy Advisory Board recommendations regarding standards. Authorizes appropriations for FY 2002 and 2003 to enable the Board to identify emerging computer security, privacy, and cryptography issues.
Section 6—Limitation on Participation in Requiring Encryption and Electronic Authentication Standards
Prohibits the Institute from adopting encryption and electronic authentication standards for other than Federal computer systems.
Section 7—Miscellaneous Amendments
Authorizes (current law requires) the Institute to draw upon National Security Agency computer security guidelines.
Section 8—Federal Computer System Security Training
Amends the Computer Security Act of 1987 to require Federal computer security training to emphasize protecting information accessible through public networks.
Section 9—Computer Security Fellowship Program
Page 187 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Authorizes appropriations for FY 2002 and 2003 for fellowships to students in computer security.
Section 10—Study of Electronic Authentication Technologies by the National Research Council
Requires a National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences to: (1) conduct a study of electronic authentication technologies; and (2) report to specified congressional committees on its findings, conclusions, and recommendations for public policy related to such technologies. Authorizes appropriations for FY 2002.
Section 11—Promotion of National Information Security
Directs the Under Secretary of Commerce for Technology to promote an increased use of security technologies for the Nation's information infrastructure, establish a central repository of information on security vulnerability and risks, and promote the development of national infrastructures for encryption technologies.
Section 12—Electronic Authentication Infrastructures
Directs the Institute's Director to develop technology-neutral electronic authentication infrastructure standards for Federal agencies, provide a list of commercially available authentication products, establish core specifications for Federal electronic certification and management technologies, provide a list of conforming systems, and report annually on infrastructure implementation.
Page 188 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 13—Authorizes appropriations for FY 2002 and 2003.
Legislative History
H.R. 1259 was introduced in the House by Representative Constance Morella on March 28, 2001 and was referred to the Committee on Science. It was discharged from the Committee on November 27, 2001 and passed the House, as amended, under suspension of the rules by: Y–391, N–4 (Roll Call No. 449). The bill was received in the Senate on November 28, 2001 and was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. No further legislative action was taken in the Senate.
2.6—H.R. 1858, National Mathematics and Science Partnership Act
Background and Summary of Legislation
President George W. Bush has called on the Nation to develop partnerships involving parents, teachers, school administrators, chief state school officers, leaders of the business community, and institutions of higher education. Individually, none of these groups has the capacity to address the problem that is before us. By forming partnerships, however, each group can make meaningful contributions and can accomplish together what none of them can accomplish alone.
The National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act responds to the President's call. Using the resources of the National Science Foundation, it encourages local communities to participate in model partnerships designed to reform the instruction of elementary and secondary school mathematics and science education. The Partnerships Act recognizes the unique contribution that institutions of higher education and businesses can make to education reform. It draws upon these strengths to develop model programs that, if proven successful, will hold the key to large-scale education reform efforts that can be conducted by state and local educational agencies.
Page 189 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
One of the first challenges that the partnerships must face will be the development and implementation of better preparatory training and professional programs for teachers. Under the partnership model, successful efforts will look beyond the colleges of education to involve professional scientists, mathematicians and engineers from institutions of higher education, government and industry. New models for professional development will be developed and elementary and secondary mathematics and science teachers will be given opportunities to expand their own horizons through research opportunities at universities, government or industry laboratories.
The need to recruit well-prepared teachers is an equally critical challenge to mathematics and science education reform. A recent study conducted by the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Preparation showed that 50,000 new teachers enter the profession each year lacking appropriate preparation. Nearly 25 percent of all secondary teachers do not have a college major or minor in their main teaching field and, in particular, more than 30 percent of secondary mathematics teachers hold neither a major nor a minor in mathematics. Teachers must possess a command of science and math content at a level sufficient to distill the important concepts and methodology and to present activities and opportunities to students that will allow them to explore and understand basic concepts, logic, and applications of mathematics and science. To encourage mathematics, science, and engineering students to pursue careers in teaching, the Act establishes the Noyce Scholarship Program in which students are offered scholarships in exchange for a commitment to teach. In addition, the Noyce Scholarship Program will facilitate transitions to careers in teaching for the most capable science, engineering, mathematics and technology professionals. These scholarships are named for Robert N. Noyce, an inventor of the integrated circuit and co-founder of Intel.
Page 190 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
A more robust body of research about student learning must guide teacher recruitment, preparation and professional development and other education reform efforts. Recent reports of the National Academy of Sciences have shown that a wide and troublesome gap exists between our current understanding of how the brain functions during learning and actual classroom practices. The gap between research and practice is even wider in the use of educational technologies in instruction or assessment. Aggressive technological expansion programs have resulted in the acquisition of computer technology by over 99 percent of schools, yet many schools have not optimized the use of these computers for instruction, assessment, or teacher enhancement. In part, this disparity in the use of technology is the result of a shortage of professional development opportunities for teachers, but also reflects a fundamental lack of understanding of how best to use technology in teaching. The Partnerships Act recognizes that better research must provide the foundation for state and local education reform efforts. Titles III and VI of the Partnerships Act authorize research programs designed to provide educators and policy makers with scientifically based methods and materials upon which to build education reform activities.
In short, this Act calls on individuals, institutions of higher education, state and local educational agencies and corporations to collaboratively develop and implement programs to recruit the Nation's brightest into careers in teaching, support these teachers through meaningful training, engage them in high quality lifelong learning opportunities, and arm them with scientifically-based, empirically validated teaching tools and practices to enable them to be successful in their work.
Legislative History
Page 191 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
On May 16, 2001, Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert introduced H.R. 1858, the National Mathematics and Science Partnerships Act, a bill to authorize appropriations for science, mathematics, engineering and technology education for Fiscal Years 2003 through 2011. On May 24, 2001 it was referred to the Subcommittee on Research.
The Subcommittee on Research met on June 7, 2001, to consider the bill. Subcommittee Chairman Nick Smith and Ranking Minority Member Eddie Bernice Johnson offered an en bloc amendment. In addition to making technical corrections to the bill, the amendment (1) removed the requirement for matching funds for each authorized program and instead permitted the Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF) to establish matching requirements for any of the programs authorized by the bill with the exception of the Noyce Scholarship program; (2) specified that allowable activities under the Mathematics and Science Education Partnerships include programs that encourage the interest of girls in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology; (3) required applications for Partnership grants that will provide education programs for students to describe how the proposed activities will encourage the interest of women and minorities in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology and prepared them to pursue further education in those fields; (4) enabled funds from Digital Libraries grants to be used to provide assistance to schools using materials made available through the Digital Library; (5) required the NSF Director to consider the capacity of grant applicants for the Strategic Education Research Centers to attract and support graduate students studying education research and related fields; (6) established a fellowship program for K–12 teachers to pursue education research at institutions of higher education; (7) changed the amount that Noyce scholarship recipients must pay back if they fail to complete their full service obligation; (8) removed the requirement that NSF hold a conference on improving K–12 science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education; (9) established a program at NSF to award grants to local educational agencies working in partnership with industry to develop and improve K–12 math, science, and information technology education programs; (10) required the NSF Director to give priority to grant proposals under the Scientific and Advanced-Technology Act of 1992 to proposals that involve secondary schools with a majority of students from groups underrepresented in the science, mathematics, and engineering workforce; (11) required the NSF Director to review NSF's in-service teacher professional development programs; and (12) established a program to award grants for the creation of centers to evaluate and improve the effectiveness of K–12 information technologies. The amendment was adopted by a voice vote.
Page 192 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
On June 13, 2001, the Committee met to consider the bill, H.R. 1858, as reported by the Subcommittee on Research. Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert and Ranking Minority Member Ralph Hall offered an en bloc amendment. In addition to making technical corrections to the bill, the amendment (1) specified that allowable activities under the Mathematics and Science Education Partnerships includes programs that support research projects performed by high school students; (2) allowed funds for Mathematics and Science Education Partnerships to be used to provide stipends for teachers or students participating in certain training or research activities; (3) required the Digital Library to compile information on national and regional K–12 education conferences; (4) required the Strategic Education Research Centers to conduct research and development activities designed to improve the performance of a broad range of students; (5) required Noyce Scholarship program recipients to supply relevant statistical and demographic data on scholarship and stipend recipients; (6) required the NSF Director to submit a report to Congress on the impact of the program; (7) allowed the NSF Director to award grants for the development of K–12 educational materials on energy issues; (8) required the NSF Director to conduct a study on the impact of and access to high bandwidth capacity to the Internet for schools and libraries; (9) allowed the NSF Director to award grants to higher education institutions to establish centers to assist K–12 schools in the use of information technology for math, science and technology instruction; and (10) allowed the NSF Director to award a grant to a consortium of community colleges to encourage women, minorities, and persons with disabilities to study mathematics, science, engineering, and technology. The amendment was adopted by a voice vote.
On July 11, 2001 the Committee on Science filed H.Rept. 107–134, Pt. 1. On July 30, 2001 the House agreed to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 1858, as amended, by a voice vote. It was received in the Senate on July 31, 2001 and referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Provisions of H.R. 1858 were included in H.R. 4664, the National Science Foundation Authorization Act which became P.L. 107–368.
Page 193 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
2.7—H.R. 2051, To authorize the National Science Foundation to establish regional centers for the purpose of plant genome and gene expression research and development and international research partnerships for the advancement of plant biotechnology in the developing world
Background and Summary of Legislation
The National Science Foundation (NSF) has been at the forefront of research aimed at better understanding the molecular, genetic, and biochemical nature of plants. Developments based on this research have driven progress in the field of agricultural biotechnology—and thus are of tremendous interest to the agricultural community. NSF-funded research in this area, however, is in keeping with the agency's mission of basic research and therefore has focused primarily on efforts to better understand the fundamental biology of plants.
One area of particular focus for NSF has been study of the plant Arabidopsis thaliana, which is a relative of plants such as broccoli and cauliflower. Arabidopsis has been used by scientists as a model organism for plant biology studies for many years, and an effort to sequence the entire Arabidopsis genome—analogous in many ways to the Human Genome Project—was completed in December 2000. That effort, part of NSF's Plant Genome Research Program, involved the work of a consortium of scientists from six different countries. NSF led the effort for the United States with support from the Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of Energy (DOE).
While having the complete DNA sequence of an organism is an important step in understanding how that organism functions, just knowing the sequence of all of an organism's genes is not enough to gain a full understanding of the organism. Central to scientists' efforts to better understand plants is a clearer understanding of what individual genes in the organism actually do—information that cannot be derived from DNA sequences alone. NSF recently launched a research program to determine the functions of all 25,000 Arabidopsis genes—the '2010 Project,' which began in FY 2001. Better understanding the specific roles of various plant genes and how they contribute to the overall function of the plant provides the foundation for all aspects of plant biotechnology.
Page 194 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
The promise of a program such as NSF's 2010 Project is in its ability to harness fundamental knowledge to solve additional research questions and, eventually, to help solve problems related to plant production and utilization. While understanding the biology of Arabidopsis will provide insight into the basic genetics and physiology of all plants, additional research is required to better understand the unique features of more complex plants including commercially-valuable crop plants such as corn and wheat. H.R. 2051 would expand NSF's support of genomics research to include new agriculturally important species and applications of the knowledge derived from studies of genomics.
Food for the Developing World.—The 'Green Revolution' of the 1960's is credited with saving a billion lives through the implementation of novel agricultural technologies—selective breeding and hybridization techniques, the introduction of inorganic fertilizers, and utilization of controlled irrigation procedures—in parts of the developing world. The Green Revolution, however, was not a permanent solution to feeding the ever-increasing world population. In his acceptance speech for the 1970 Nobel Peace Prize, Dr. Norman Borlaug cautioned that the Green Revolution had only 'won a temporary success in man's war against hunger,' given the globe's burgeoning population. While the world's population has grown significantly over the past four decades, natural resources and cropland have not. In addition, subsistence farming has led to mineral depletion, erosion, and increased salinity or acidity of much of that land. While technological developments have resulted in improved crop yields, many people in the developing world still go hungry every day.
Biotechnology has already shown promise for producing plants that are more tolerant to drought or high soil salt levels, can resist insect, fungal, and viral infections, and improve the nutritional content of food. Also, since some staple crops of the African diet, such as the cassava tuber, have little or no nutritive value, enhancing the nutritional content of food could be a key weapon in the fight against malnutrition and disease. For example, the 'golden rice' project, which involved the incorporation of genes able to lead to the production of vitamin A in rice, created a nutritionally-enhanced plant that could potentially reduce the effects—such as blindness—of endemic vitamin A deficiency in the developing world. Other nutritionally-enhanced food products, such as those with increased levels of cancer-fighting compounds, for example, could also potentially be produced. Beyond plant-based production of pharmaceuticals, researchers are also using biotechnology to develop foods that are a direct source of edible vaccines. These vaccines are genetically incorporated into food plants, need no refrigeration, and require no sterilization equipment or needles for delivery. Such a vaccine delivery system could overcome many of the health care and transportation infrastructure limitations in many parts of the developing world.
Page 195 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Federal funding for genomic research on developing world crops, or so called 'orphan crops,' will play an important role in the development of agricultural biotechnology in the developing world. Private companies have contributed a great deal to the advancement of agricultural biotechnology, but their focus has been on commodities that are grown in temperate climates, such as corn and soybeans. Little research has been done on orphan crops because private companies have very little incentive to invest in products that will not bring a financial return. While not a solution in itself in combating many of the problems of the developing world, public funding for genomic and biotechnology research on developing world crops will serve as a catalyst in helping the technology reach its potential in fighting hunger, malnutrition and disease.
Research on risks associated with agricultural biotechnology.—Balancing these promising technological developments, however, are concerns that the introduction of new compounds to a given plant could upset the biochemical balance of the plant in a way that renders the plant harmful for human consumption. Additional research, including that aimed at better understanding the underlying biology of plants and the effects of introducing new biochemical pathways, will continue to develop our ability to assess any risks to the environment or to human health that these new varieties may pose.
Other potential risks to the environment exist as well. Transmission of unwanted genetic traits from modified crop plants to nearby plant relatives, adverse impacts on insect populations that feed on modified plants, more rapid acquisition of resistance to pesticides by insect pests, and other ecological concerns will require additional assessment.
Page 196 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Beyond technological concerns, socioeconomic issues associated with the development and use of these new technologies in developing countries exist as well. For example, these countries typically do not have national regulatory bodies that review genetically altered crops to determine whether their introduction is appropriate.
The programs authorized by H.R. 2051 will enable researchers to build on our current knowledge base and accelerate the development of this promising technology while continuing to address concerns related to its safety.
Legislative History
On June 5, 2001, Research Subcommittee Chairman Nick Smith introduced H.R. 2051, a bill to provide for the establishment of regional plant genome and gene expression research and development centers. On June 15, 2001 it was referred to the Subcommittee on Research and a hearing was held on September 25, 2001.
The Subcommittee on Research met on December 12, 2001, to consider the bill. Representative Smith and the Subcommittee Ranking Minority Member Eddie Bernice Johnson, offered an en bloc amendment. In addition to making technical corrections to the bill, the amendment incorporated the major provisions of H.R. 2912, a bill to establish plant biotechnology partnerships with the developing world, introduced by Representative Johnson. The amendment also (1) dropped the requirement that NSF could not contribute more than 50 percent of the funds needed to establish plant genome and gene expression centers; and (2) combined the authorization amounts of H.R. 2051 and H.R. 2912 into one authorization amount for carrying out the provisions of the bill. The amendment was adopted by a voice vote.
Page 197 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
On March 20, 2002, the Committee met to consider the bill, H.R. 2051, as reported by the Subcommittee on Research. With a quorum present, Ms. Johnson moved that the Committee report the bill, H.R. 2051, as amended. The motion was agreed to by a voice vote. On April 30, 2002 the Committee on Science filed H.Rept. 107–422.
On May 14, 2002 the House agreed to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 2051, as amended, by a voice vote and on May 15, 2002 it was received in the Senate and referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Provisions of H.R. 2051 were included in H.R. 4664, the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 which became P.L. 107–368.
2.8—H.R. 2275, Voting Technology Standards Act of 2001
Background and Summary of Legislation
Establishes a commission, chaired by the director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), to develop voluntary technical standards to ensure the usability, accuracy, security, and integrity of U.S. voting products and systems.
Requires NIST to: (1) accredit independent laboratories to test and certify that voting products and systems conform with the standards established by the commission; (2) disseminate such standards, other relevant technical information, guidelines for usage of the standards, and any other information appropriate to assist States in implementing the standards; and (3) maintain and make available, including through the Internet, a list of U.S. voting products and systems that have been certified by an accredited laboratory to conform with the standards established by the commission.
Page 198 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Directs the Director of NIST to establish a program for research and development in areas to support the development of such standards.
Legislative History
On May 22, 2001, the Science Committee held a hearing to examine the role of standards in voting technology. Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards Chairman Vernon J. Ehlers introduced H.R. 2275, for himself and Ranking Minority Member James Barcia, on June 21, 2001.
The Subcommittee met on June 27, 2001, to consider the bill. Chairman Ehlers and Ranking Minority Member Barcia offered a manager's amendment, which was adopted by a voice vote. The Subcommittee favorably reported the bill, H.R. 2275, by a voice vote, as amended.
On July 18, 2001, the Committee on Science met to consider H.R. 2275. Representative Sheila Jackson Lee offered an en bloc amendment to restrict Voting Standards Commissioners to serving no more than three terms, ensure the accreditation of at least one minority-owned testing laboratory, and require a report to Congress. The amendment was adopted by a voice vote.
The Committee on Science favorably reported the bill, H.R. 2275, as amended, by a voice vote.
Provisions of H.R. 2275, including those: (1) creating a panel of experts led by the director of NIST to develop voluntary voting standards; (2) directing NIST to evaluate laboratories for accreditation for the testing of voting equipment; and (3) authorizing research to support the development of voting system standards, were incorporated into H.R. 3295, the Help America Vote Act, as introduced in the House on November 14, 2001.
Page 199 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
H.R. 3295 was cleared for the President on October 16, 2002 and signed into law on October 29, 2002, becoming P.L. 107–252.
2.9—H.R. 2426, Remote Sensing Applications Act of 2002
Background and Summary of Legislation
The Remote Sensing Applications Act of 2002 directs the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to: (1) establish a program of grants for pilot projects to explore the integrated use of sources of remote sensing and other geospatial information to address State, local, regional, and tribal agency needs; (2) establish an advisory committee to monitor the program; (3) transmit to Congress an independent evaluation of program effectiveness; and (4) ensure that project results are retrievable through an Internet-accessible database. It also requires the Administrator to seek opportunities to assist: (1) in the development of commercial applications potentially available from the remote sensing industry; and (2) State, local, regional, and tribal agencies in applying remote sensing and geospatial information technologies for growth management.
The bill also requires the Administrator to establish an educational outreach program to increase awareness at institutions of higher education and such agencies of the potential applications of remote sensing and geospatial information. In addition to this, the bill requires the Administrator to study the effect of remote sensing imagery costs on potential State, local, regional, and tribal agency applications.
Page 200 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
On June 28, 2001 Representative Mark Udall introduced H.R. 2426, the Remote Sensing Application Act of 2001. It was referred to the House Science Committee, Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics on July 9, 2001.
On May 20, 2002, the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics held a hearing on state and local community use of NASA's remote sensing applications program.
On September 30, 2002 the House Science Committee discharged H.R. 2460 and on October 1, 2002 the House agreed to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 2460, as amended, by a voice vote. The measure was received in the Senate on October 2, 2002. No further legislative action was taken.
2.10—H.R. 2460, Comprehensive Energy Research and Technology Act of 2001
Background and Summary of Legislation
H.R. 2460 authorizes R&D funding and enumerates goals for energy RD&D and commercial application programs targeting the following areas: (1) energy conservation and efficiency with respect to the building technology, state, and community sector, the industry sector, power technologies, and the transportation sector; (2) renewable energy targeting hydrogen research, bioenergy, geothermal technology development, hydropower, concentrating solar power, photovoltaic energy systems, solar building technology research, wind energy systems, electric energy systems and storage, international renewable energy and renewable energy production incentive programs, and renewable program support; (3) nuclear energy; (4) fossil energy; and (5) science. The bill also provides cost-sharing and reporting guidelines.
Page 201 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
H.R. 2460 was introduced by Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert on July 11, 2001 and was referred to the Committee on Science and Subcommittee on Energy. On July 17, 2001, the subcommittee discharged the bill. The Committee met on July 18, 2001 and ordered the measure reported, as amended, by a voice vote. On July 31, 2001, the Committee filed H.Rept. 107–177. Provisions of H.R. 2460 were incorporated into H.R. 4, the Securing America's Future Energy Act of 2001, which is described in detail above.
2.11—H.R. 2478, Comprehensive Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Act of 2001
Background and Summary of Legislation
The purpose of this bill is to set forth a statutory framework for RD&D and commercial applications programs designed to enable 20 percent of domestic energy to be generated from non-hydropower renewable energy sources by 2020. The bill prescribes requirements for such programs in renewable energy and energy efficiency and sets goals for energy RD&D and commercial application programs. Also includes tax provisions relating to incentives for energy efficiency and renewable energy.
The bill instructs the Secretary of Energy to: (1) provide private sector commercialization assistance for renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies; (2) establish a fuel cell technologies demonstration program; and (3) establish a National Electric System Public Benefits Board to administer a National Electric System Public Benefits Fund.
Page 202 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
It sets goals for energy RD&D, and commercial application programs targeting the following areas: (1) energy conservation and efficiency; (2) renewable energy; (3) nuclear energy; (4) fossil energy; and (5) science.
The bill also: establishes the High Performance Schools grant program; amends Federal transportation law to mandate: (1) increased vehicle fuel economy standards; and (2) a national tire fuel efficiency program; establishes the Energy Star program to promote cost-effective energy-efficient products and buildings; prescribes requirements for: (1) Federal electric power purchases; (2) Federal buildings energy efficiency; (3) guaranteed energy savings; and (4) Federal use of Energy Star standards.
Finally, the bill makes a number of changes to the Internal Revenue Code to allow tax credits for: (1) certain energy efficient business property; (2) the manufacture of energy efficient appliances; (3) construction of a new energy-efficient home; (4) energy efficiency improvements to existing homes; (5) residential solar, wind, and fuel cell energy property; and (6) purchase of Energy Star products. It allows a deduction for energy-efficient commercial building property expenditures, and prescribes depreciation requirements for: (1) distributed power property; and (2) property used in electricity transmission. Increases the credit rate for electricity produced from renewable and waste products. Treats facilities using bagasse to produce energy as solid waste disposal facilities eligible for tax-exempt financing. Grants an investment tax credit for additional plant capacity for existing renewable resources facilities producing electricity. In addition, it allows tax credits for: (1) alternative motor vehicles placed in service; (2) retail sales of alternative fuels for motor vehicles; and (3) installation of alternative fueling stations. Extends the deduction for certain refueling property.
Page 203 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
On July 11, 2001, Representative Lynn Woolsey, Ranking Minority Member of the Subcommittee on Energy, introduced H.R. 2478. It was referred to the Committees on Science, Ways and Means, and Energy and Commerce. On July 23, 2001 it was referred to the Subcommittee on Energy of the Committee on Science. On July 31, 2001, the bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality, of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Rep. Woolsey incorporated the goals section of H.R. 2478 into H.R. 2460, the Comprehensive Energy Research and Technology Act of 2001, by way of amendment, which was subsequently incorporated into Division B of H.R. 4.
2.12—H.R. 2587, Energy Advancement and Conservation Act of 2001
Background and Summary of Legislation
The purposes of H.R. 2587 are to enhance energy conservation and to provide for security and diversity in the energy supply for the American people.
Title I: Energy Conservation Subtitle A: Reauthorization of Federal Energy Conservation Programs—Amends the Department of Energy Organization Act to reauthorize through FY 2006 specified Federal Energy Conservation Programs including: (1) promotion of export of energy efficient products; (2) energy conservation standards for new buildings; (3) the Federal Energy Management Program; (4) energy efficient lighting and building centers; (5) energy efficiency labeling for windows and window systems; (6) energy efficiency for commercial office equipment; (7) energy efficiency information for luminaries; (8) energy efficiency in industrial facilities; and (9) process-oriented industrial energy efficiency.
Page 204 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
H.R. 2587 was introduced by Representative W.J. (Billy) Tauzin and jointly referred to the Committee on Science on July 23, 2001. The Committees of jurisdiction discharged the bill on July 25, 2001. Provisions of H.R. 2587 were incorporated into H.R. 4, Securing America's Future Energy Act of 2002.
2.13—H.R. 2983, Price-Anderson Reauthorization Act of 2001
Background and Summary of Legislation
H.R. 2983 amends the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to extend from 2002 to 2017 the indemnification authority of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Secretary of Energy (Secretary) with respect to certain licensees, Department of Energy (DOE) contractors, and nonprofit educational institution. In addition to the extension of indemnification authority, it also provides for an increased maximum assessment that may be assessed a licensee following a nuclear incident (Section 3); prohibits application in any foreign country whose government has been identified as engaged in State sponsorship of terrorist activities (Section 10); makes additional requirements for transfer of specified nuclear materials (Section 11); instructs the President to study and report to Congress on threats to NRC-licensed facilities and Federal actions taken to address them (Section 12); mandates that the Secretary issue appropriate industrial health and safety regulations applicable to contractors and subcontractors at DOE nuclear facilities (Section 13); requires the NRC, before entering into an indemnification agreement with respect to a utilization facility, to consult with the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security (Section 14); and authorizes the Attorney General prosecute intentional corporate misconduct (Section 15).
Page 205 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
On October 2, 2001, Representative Heather Wilson introduced H.R. 2983, and it was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce. It was subsequently referred to the Committee on Science on November 19, 2001, and was discharged the next day.
On November 27, 2001, the bill was considered under suspension of the rules, and was agreed to, as amended, by voice vote. The bill was received in the Senate and placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar.
The Senate included Price-Anderson Act Reauthorization provisions in its amendment to H.R. 4 in Title V, Subtitle A, Section 501–509. The Senate Amendment to H.R. 4 passed the Senate on April 25, 2002. The Science Committee Members were appointed by the Speaker to be conferees on all of Subtitle A—except Section 508 (treatment of modular reactors).
Since the Energy Conference failed to complete action on comprehensive energy legislation before adjournment, the provisions related to the Price-Anderson reauthorization failed to be enacted with one exception. That provision, extending the indemnification of Department of Energy contractors through the end of 2004, was included as Section 3171 in the Conference Report on H.R. 4546, the Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003. The Conference Report passed the House on November 12, 2002 and the Senate on November 13, 2002.
The President signed H.R. 4546 on December 2, 2002 and it became P.L. 107–314.
Page 206 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
2.14—H.R. 3130, Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology Education Improvement Act
Background and Summary of Legislation
As U.S. economic growth continues to depend largely upon advances in science and technology, the Nation's continued prosperity is linked inextricably to the ability to produce a technologically sophisticated workforce. However, since 1986, while the percentage of degrees awarded in the biological and social sciences has increased sharply, there has been a troubling decrease in the percentage of U.S. baccalaureate degrees awarded in the physical sciences, engineering, mathematics, and computer science. In contrast, Asian and European countries have shown strong growth in degree production in all science and engineering fields and Asian institutions of higher education produce approximately six times as many engineering degrees as do U.S. institutions.
The limited numbers of students pursuing science, mathematics, and engineering degrees appears to be a result of at least two factors: too few students who enter college wanting to major in one of those fields, and too many students who initially show such interest changing their minds during the first two years of their college education. Evidence of a decline in the percentage of freshmen choosing to enter and remain in mathematics and science-based majors first became apparent in the mid-1980s, as a result of a number of studies. Researchers determined that 40 percent of science, mathematics, and engineering undergraduates left the major, and that most did so within the first 2.5 years of the undergraduate experience. Similarly, a 2002 report by the U.S. Department of Education's National Center for Educational Statistics showed that fewer than 50 percent of students who intend to major in science and engineering fields complete a science or engineering degree within five years.
Page 207 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
There is some evidence that poor K–12 preparation in mathematics has a significant impact on a student's decision to enroll in undergraduate science, mathematics and engineering coursework. According to the National Science Foundation's (NSF) Science and Engineering Indicators 2002, more than 40 percent of freshmen at public two-year colleges and 22 percent of freshmen at public four-year colleges required remedial work in reading, writing or mathematics. Among its science and engineering disciplines, approximately 28 percent of first-year students intending to major in the social and behavioral sciences and 25 percent of those intending to major in biological or agricultural science reported the need for remedial mathematics instruction. Fifteen percent of engineering and physical sciences majors reported a similar need for remedial mathematics instruction. A recent survey also found that students are facing increasing demands on their time, with nearly 75 percent of today's college students engaging in at least part-time work and 25 percent working full time.
However, factors not under the control of institutions of higher education, such as preparation at the K–12 level and non-academic workload, seem unlikely to provide the entire explanation for the current situation. While it has been difficult to determine the precise factors that precipitate an individual student's decision to leave a science or engineering major, a number of signs point of factors such as poor teaching and limited mentoring. For example, a 1997 study of students who scored high (above 650) on the mathematics section of the SAT I and who declared majors in science, mathematics and engineering showed that both those who switched out of science, mathematics and engineering majors and those who persisted in these majors through graduation had similar complaints of poor teaching and difficulty in getting help with academic problems. The authors of this study were unable to identify the precise factors that differentiated the 'switchers' from the 'survivors,' but anecdotal evidence highlighted the positive impact of intervention by a faculty member at a crisis time in the student's academic or personal life.
Page 208 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Some experts who are critical of the current undergraduate education enterprise have pointed to factors such as lack of rewards for faculty engaged in undergraduate education, poor facilities, limited equipment and supplies for education-based activities, and a 'survival of the fittest' mentality in science, mathematics and engineering departments as likely additional reasons for the high attrition rates evident in science and engineering programs.
Adding to the complexity of the problem is the diversity of undergraduate institutions in the U.S. Although research-intensive universities produce most of the engineering degrees and a large proportion of the natural and social science degrees at the undergraduate level, student enrollment at those institutions represents less than 30 percent of the total undergraduate enrollment nationwide. Comprehensive universities and colleges account for approximately 23 percent of the total U.S. undergraduate enrollment, and liberal arts institutions for approximately seven percent. Two-year colleges account for nearly 40 percent of the total undergraduate enrollment, and yet their impact on the number of science and engineering baccalaureate degrees conferred remains largely unrecognized since many students transfer to a four-year institution without first earning an associate degree. The diversity of U.S. institutions of higher education should be regarded as a strength, and not a liability, in improving scientific literacy broadly and in increasing the number of science and engineering graduates in particular, but it is clear that reform must not be a one-size-fits-all endeavor.
While current data provide no clear guidelines or best practices regarding undergraduate education reform, both the National Research Council's Committee on Undergraduate Science Education and NSF have made a number of recommendations regarding institutional and departmental reforms necessary to improve undergraduate science and engineering education. Those recommendations include:
Page 209 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Take an institutional approach to change and ensure that the undergraduate education activities of the institution are a high priority;
Teach all students basic math and science literacy so that they can function in a technologically sophisticated world and so that more students can prepare for careers in science and engineering;
Help faculty improve their teaching through the incorporation of research on learning into the classroom and through the inclusion of collaborative and active learning, discovery and inquiry in the classroom;
Increase opportunities for undergraduate research so that all students, and especially students majoring in science and engineering and those preparing to be teachers, are engaged in the excitement of new research findings;
Expand interdisciplinary teaching to better reflect the increased workplace emphasis on interdisciplinary approaches; and
Include industry and potential employers in planning curricular changes.
This Act addresses each of the recommendations above and provides activities and funding intended to foster and facilitate improved undergraduate education at all institutions and for all students. The Act is focused on reforms that will improve student learning and increase the number and quality of science, mathematics, engineering and technology majors. In addition, this Act provides the framework for a national evaluation of 'what works' through the identification of causal relationships between practices and outcomes.
Page 210 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
On October 16, 2001, Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert and Representative John Larson introduced H.R. 3130, the Technology Talent Act of 2001, a bill to provide for increasing the technically trained workforce in the United States. On October 29, 2001 it was referred to the Subcommittee on Research and a hearing was held on March 7, 2002.
The Subcommittee on Research met on May 9, 2002, to consider the bill. Chairman Boehlert, Representative Larson, Research Subcommittee Chairman Nick Smith and Ranking Minority Member Eddie Bernice Johnson offered an Amendment in the nature of a substitute. In addition to making technical corrections to the bill, the amendment (1) restricted disciplines included in the Technology Talent program to the physical and information sciences, mathematics, engineering and technology; (2) required the National Science Foundation (NSF) Director to award Institutional Reform grants to expand previously implemented undergraduate reform activities that have proven to be successful in increasing the number and quality of students receiving degrees in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology; (3) required the Director to award grants for professional development of undergraduate faculty in support of improved undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education; (4) required the Director to award grants to institutions of higher education to support the acquisition of research grade instrumentation and to support training related to its use; (5) required the Director to award grants to establish sites that provide research experiences for 10 or more undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and technology students; (6) required that all science, mathematics, engineering, and technology projects sponsored by NSF disseminate project information and results via the Internet; (7) required the Director to evaluate the effectiveness of all undergraduate science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education activities supported by NSF; and (8) required a study on the factors that influence undergraduates to enter and complete degrees in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology programs. The amendment was adopted by a voice vote.
Page 211 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
The Committee met on May 22, 2002, to consider the bill. Chairman Boehlert offered an amendment making technical changes to the bill. An amendment was offered by Representative Lynn Woolsey that would require the Director to strive to increase the number of underrepresented students receiving baccalaureate degrees in science, mathematics, engineering and technology and to require the program evaluation to include disaggregated data reflecting minority enrollment and graduation rates. Representative Joe Baca offered an amendment that would establish a Minority Serving Institutions Undergraduate Program to award grants to enhance the quality of science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education at qualifying minority-serving institutions. Representative Brian Baird offered an amendment that would amend the Scientific and Advanced Technology act of 1992 by: (1) expanding the purpose of NSF's Advanced Technological Education (ATE) program to include improvement of core math and science courses; (2) expanding the activities under the articulation partnerships section to include student research experiences at four year institutions; (3) establishing an ATE program Advisory Committee; and (4) authorizing additional funding for acquisition of state-of-the-art instruments required for science and technology education. These four amendments were merged into one en bloc amendment, which was passed by a voice vote.
On June 12, 2002 the Science Committee filed H.Rept. 107–505, Pt. 1. On July 9, 2002 the House agreed to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 3130, as amended, by a voice vote. On July 11, 2002 it was received in the Senate and referred to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. Provisions of H.R. 3130 were included in H.R. 4664, the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 which became P.L. 107–368.
2.15—H.R. 3178, Water Infrastructure Security and Research Development Act
Page 212 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Background and Summary of Legislation
H.R. 3178 directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to protect water supply systems by establishing a program of research, development, and demonstration activities to achieve improvements to technologies and related processes for the security of water supply systems. It authorizes the program to be carried out through grants to, or cooperative agreements with, research organizations for the research and development of (1) technologies to assess the vulnerabilities of water supply and related information systems, (2) technologies capable of monitoring in real time chemical, biological, and radiological attacks, (3) technologies and processes to mitigate the effects of and recover from such attacks. The bill authorizes $12 million for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006.
Legislative History
On October 30, 2001, Science Committee Chairman Sherwood Boehlert introduced H.R. 3178 and it was referred to the Committee on Science. The Committee held a hearing on November 14, 2001 and reported the bill from Committee on November 15, 2001. The bill was passed by the House by a voice vote on December 18, 2001, and subsequently placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar.
Provisions from H.R. 3178, including provisions to: (1) provide assistance for the assessment of vulnerabilities and for equipment to detect vulnerabilities in water systems; (2) monitor in real time a chemical, biological, and radiological attack on a water supply; and (3) mitigate the effects of any such attacks, were included in Conference Committee in Title IV of H.R. 3448, the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Response Act. H.R. 3448 was cleared for the President on May 23, 2002, and signed into law on June 12, becoming P.L. 107–188.
Page 213 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
2.16—H.R. 3400, Networking and Information Technology Research Advancement Act
Background and Summary of Legislation
H.R. 3400 amends the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 to rename the National High-Performance Computing Program the Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Program, expanding its focus beyond Federal high-performance computing research and coordination to include all Federal networking and information technology activities.
Section 4—Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Program
Requires such program to address the issues of network information systems security as well as more general research goals, including network stability and the social and economic consequences of such technology.
Requires the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy's annual report to include a detailed description of the Program Component Areas, including changes and activities contributing to network security improvement.
Expands the role of the advisory commission to include program evaluation.
Repeals provisions concerning the National Research and Education Network and the Next Generation Internet Program.
Page 214 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 5—Agency Activities
Revises research activities of the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Departments of Energy and Commerce (including the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), and the Environmental Protection Agency to incorporate networking and information technology. Authorizes appropriations for FY 2003 through 2007.
Section 6—Reports
Requires the Director of the NSF to: (1) arrange for an assessment of the state of research on networking and information technology in the United States; and (2) continually collect and arrange for the analysis of data on the information technology workforce, including size, occupation category, education, training, compensation, and the role of foreign workers. Requires the results of the assessment and data analysis to be reported to Congress as specified.
Section 7—Research Center
Directs the NSF to establish a center for research on information technology questions related to crisis management as part of the National High-Performance Computing Program. Authorizes the use of funds for human-computer interface technologies, network-based collaboration tools, network compatibility and reliability, wireless networks, and software and simulation.
Page 215 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Authorizes appropriations for FY 2003 through 2007.
Legislative History
On December 4, 2001, Chairman Nick Smith of the Research Subcommittee of the Committee on Science introduced H.R. 3400. The Committee on Science held a markup on December 6, 2001 and ordered the measure reported, as amended, by a voice vote. On June 18, 2002, the Committee filed H.Rept. 107–511. No further legislative action was taken on this measure.
2.17—H.R. 3488, Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002
Background and Summary of Legislation
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is required under the Computer Security Act (P.L. 100–235) to promulgate standards for information security for the Federal Government. The government-wide adoption of such standards has been uneven in consistency of application. The bill clarifies that such NIST standards shall be government-wide standards and shall be implemented in a consistent manner throughout the Federal Government. The bill also establishes an Information Security and Privacy Advisory Board that shall advise NIST, the Secretary of Commerce, and the Director of Management and Budget on information security and privacy issues.
Legislative History
Representative Tom Davis introduced H.R. 3488 on March 5, 2002. The bill was referred to the Committee on Government Reform and sequentially referred to the Committee on Science. Provisions of the bill were incorporated as Section 3 of H.R. 2458, the ''E-Government Act of 2001.'' H.R. 2458 was considered and passed by the House on November 15, 2002 and received and passed under unanimous consent by the Senate on the same day. The President signed H.R. 2458 into law on December 27, 2002 which became P.L. 107–347.
Page 216 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
2.18—H.R. 3929, Energy Pipeline Research, Development, and Demonstration Act
Background and Summary of Legislation
The purpose of the bill is to establish a Federal research, development, demonstration and standardization program to be formed by the heads of the Department of Energy, the Department of Transportation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (the ''participating agencies'') to ensure the integrity of ''energy pipelines'' and ''next-generation pipelines.'' The bill defines ''energy pipeline'' as a pipeline system used in the transmission or local distribution of natural gas, crude oil, or refined petroleum products and ''next-generation pipelines'' as a transmission or local distribution pipeline system for transmitting energy or energy-related products, in liquid or gaseous form, other than energy pipelines. Finally, the bill authorizes appropriations to carry out the purposes of the bill.
Legislative History
Science Committee Ranking Minority Member Ralph Hall introduced H.R. 3929 on March 12, 2002. It was referred to the Committee on Science and, in addition, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
The bill was then referred to the Subcommittee on Energy, which held a hearing on March 13, 2001. Testifying before the Subcommittee were Mr. Terry Boss, Vice President of Environment, Safety and Operations at Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, Mr. Tim Felt, President of Explorer Pipeline Corporation on behalf of the Association of Oil Pipe Lines, Dr. Nirmal Chatterjee, Vice President of Environmental, Health and Safety and Corporate Engineering at Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., and Mr. Stan Wise, Commissioner of Georgia Public Service Commission on behalf of NARUC, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners.
Page 217 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
On March 20, 2002, the Committee on Science held a markup on H.R. 3929 and ordered the measure reported, as amended, by a voice vote.
On May 16, 2002, the Committee on Science filed H.Rept. 107–475, Pt. 1. During committee consideration of H.R. 3609, the Pipeline Infrastructure Protection to Enhance Security and Safety Act, by both committees of primary jurisdiction over the pipeline safety program, the provisions of H.R. 3929 were incorporated by amendments offered in the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee by Representative Jerry Costello and in the Energy and Commerce Committee by Ranking Minority Member Hall.
On July 23, 2002, the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy and Commerce both reported H.R. 3609 (H.Rept 107–605, Part 1 for the Committee on Transportation; H.Rept. 107–605, Part 2 for the Committee on Energy and Commerce). H.R. 3609 passed the House under suspension of the rules on the same day, July 23, 2002, by a vote of 423–4 (Roll Call No. 334).
Since the H.R. 4 conference on comprehensive energy legislation was already underway and the Senate amendment to H.R. 4 contained comprehensive pipeline safety provisions, the House-passed pipeline safety bill (H.R. 3609) formed the House position in negotiations with the Senate during the conference on H.R. 4. A compromise pipeline safety provision was negotiated between the House and the Senate with the participation of Science Committee conferees. On September 12, 2002, the Energy bill Conferees approved the text of the negotiated pipeline safety portion of the bill, including provisions on RD&D, taken from the text of H.R. 3929. However, negotiations on the rest of the H.R. 4 Conference failed to reach a final agreement on the bill.
Page 218 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
On November 13, 2002, when it became clear that final action on an Energy bill was not possible, the Senate took up the House-passed free-standing pipeline safety bill (H.R. 3609), amended it to read as approved by the House and Senate Conference on H.R. 4, and passed the bill without objection and without further amendment. On December 9, 2002, H.R. 3609, Pipeline Infrastructure Protection to Enhance Security and Safety Act was presented to the President for signature. He signed the measure on December 17, 2002 and it became P.L. 107–355.
2.19—H.R. 4966, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Act
Background and Summary of Legislation
The purpose of H.R. 4966 is to improve the conservation and management of coastal and ocean resources by reenacting and clarifying provisions of a reorganization plan authorizing the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
Section 1. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Section 1 of this bill amends the material preceding Title I of the 1992 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Authorization Act (P.L. 102–567) to update the short title, the definitions, and to replace Reorganization Plan #4. This section also adds several new sections to the Act: Section 3 establishes the primary missions of NOAA and the line office structure; and Sections 4 through 8 authorize the position of the Under Secretary, the Assistant Secretary, the Deputy Under Secretary, the General Counsel and the Assistant Administrators, respectively. Section 9 assures that current appointees continue to serve in the listed jobs, and makes conforming amendments.
Page 219 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Section 2. NOAA Ocean and Coastal Programs
Section 2 of the bill amends sections of Title II of the Act, and adds several new sections at the end of that title. Section 201 of the Act is amended by striking 'the development of ocean technology' as a goal of the Coastal Ocean Program. Section 202 is updated to include authorization for NOAA's coastal and ocean-related laboratories, including the Great Lakes Environmental Laboratory, the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory, and the Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory. Section 203 replaces outdated authorizations of appropriations with an authorization for the National Undersea Research Program. Sections 206 through 209 are new sections of the Act; these authorize the Ocean Exploration Program, a Coastal Ocean Observing System, a Science Advisory Board, and appropriations for operations, research, and facilities relating to ocean, coastal and Great Lakes research. The Ocean Exploration and National Undersea Research Programs, the Science Advisory Board, and the Coastal Ocean Observing System already exist in NOAA but have no specific statutory authorization.
Section 3. Program Support; Notice of Reprogramming
Section 3 amends Title IV of the Act. Here, the 'Corporate Services,' 'Marine Operations and Maintenance' and 'Notice of Reprogramming' sections are modified to reflect current practices. A 'Facilities' section is also added that authorizes appropriations for maintenance, repair, and associated activities.
Legislative History
Page 220 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
H.R. 4966 was introduced on June 19, 2002 by Representative Wayne Gilchrest and was referred Committee on Resources and, in addition, to the Committee on Science. On June 20, 2002, the Committee on Science referred the measure to its Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards. Within the Committee on Resources, the bill was referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans. On September 12, 2002, the Full Resources Committee met to consider the bill. The Subcommittee was discharged from further consideration of the bill by unanimous consent. Representative Gilchrest offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute that added several authorizations for NOAA's marine research programs. It was adopted by unanimous consent. The bill, as amended, was then ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by unanimous consent. On October 16, 2002, the referral to the Committee on Science was extended to October 18, 2002 at which time it was again extended to November 22, 2002. No further legislative action was taken on this measure.
2.20—H.R. 5303, Charles ''Pete'' Conrad Astronomy Awards Act
Background and Summary of Legislation
The Charles ''Pete'' Conrad Astronomy Awards Act authorizes the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to: (1) establish the Charles ''Pete'' Conrad Astronomy Awards Program to reward outstanding amateur astronomers who make asteroid discoveries, and to augment the Government's asteroid discovery efforts; and (2) contract with the Minor Planet Center of the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory to administer the program.
The Act also sets forth three annual award categories for: (1) the amateur astronomer who, using amateur equipment only, discovers the largest absolute magnitude new asteroid having a near-Earth orbit during the preceding calendar year; (2) pre-discovery and recovery efforts; and (3) the amateur astronomer, or professional not funded for optical astronomy, who provides the greatest service to update the minor planet catalogue.
Page 221 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
The Charles ''Pete'' Conrad Astronomy Awards Act was introduced on July 26, 2002 by Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Chairman Dana Rohrabacher and referred to the Committee on Science. On July 31, 2002, the measure was referred to the Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics. On September 30, 2002 the House agreed to suspend the rules and pass H.R. 5303, as amended, by a voice vote.
The Senate received the bill on October 2, 2002 and referred the measure to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. No further legislative action was taken on the measure.
Chapter III—Commemorative Resolutions Discharged by the Committee on Science
3.1—H.Con.Res. 27, Honoring the National Institute of Standards and Technology and Its Employees for 100 Years of Service to the Nation
Background and Summary of Legislation
Honors the National Institute of Standards and Technology and its employees for 100 years of service to the Nation.
Legislative History
Page 222 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
H.Con.Res. 27 was introduced on February 13, 2001 by Representative Constance Morella and referred to the Committee on Science. On February 28, 2001, the Committee discharged the measure and the House agreed to suspend the rules and pass H.Con.Res. 27 by: Y–413, N–1 (Roll Call No. 20). On March 1, 2001, it was received in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by unanimous consent.
3.2—H.Con.Res. 108, Honoring the National Science Foundation for 50 Years of Service to the Nation
Background and Summary of Legislation
Recognizes and acknowledges the 50th anniversary of the National Science Foundation (NSF) and its achievement and service to the United States.
Reaffirms commitment for the next 50 years to support research, education, and technological advancement and discovery through the NSF, the premier scientific agency in the Federal Government.
Legislative History
H.Con.Res. 108 was introduced on April 25, 2001 by Research Subcommittee Chairman Nick Smith and referred to the Committee on Science. On May 8, 2001, it was discharged by the Committee and the House agreed to suspend the rules and pass the measure by a voice vote. The Senate agreed to H.Con.Res. 108 by unanimous consent on May 9, 2001.
Page 223 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
3.3—H.Con.Res. 157, Recognizing and Honoring Joseph Henry for His Significant and Distinguished Role in the Development and Advancement of Science and Electricity
Background and Summary of Legislation
Recognizes and honors Joseph Henry for his significant and distinguished role in the development and advancement of science and electricity.
Legislative History
H.Con.Res. 157 was introduced by Representative Michael McNulty on June 12, 2001 and referred to the Committee on Science. On November 27, 2001, the Committee discharged the measure and the House agreed to suspend the rules and pass H.Con.Res. 157 by a voice vote. It was received in the Senate on November 28, 2001 and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. No further legislative action was taken on this measure.
3.4—H.Con.Res. 387, Recognizing the American Society of Civil Engineers for Reaching Its 150th Anniversary and for the Many Vital Contributions of Civil Engineers to the Quality of Life of Our Nation's People Including the Research and Development Projects That Have Led to the Physical Infrastructure of Modern America
Background and Summary of Legislation
Acknowledges the American Society of Civil Engineers for its 150th Anniversary and encourages it to continue its tradition of excellence in service to the profession of civil engineering and to the public. Commends the many achievements of the Nation's civil engineers.
Page 224 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Legislative History
H.Con.Res. 387 was introduced by Representative Joe Barton on April 25, 2002 and referred to the Committee on Science. On May 14, 2002, the Committee discharged the measure and the House agreed to suspend the rules and pass H.Con.Res. 387 by a voice vote. It was received in the Senate on May 15, 2002 and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. The Senate Committee on the Judiciary ordered H.Con.Res. 387 reported, without amendment, by a voice vote on June 13, 2002. The Senate agreed to the measure by a voice vote on June 18, 2002.
3.5—H.Con.Res. 476, Expressing Support for the Goals and Ideas of a Day of Tribute to All Firefighters
Background and Summary of Legislation
Supports the goals and ideas of a day of tribute to all firefighters who have died in the line of duty.
Recognizes the important mission of the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation in assisting family members to overcome the loss of their fallen heroes.
Legislative History
H.Con.Res. 476 was introduced by Representative Curt Weldon on September 19, 2002 and referred to the Committee on Science. On September 30, 2002, it was discharged by the Committee. The House agreed to suspend the rules and pass H.Con.Res. 476 by: Y–407, N–0 (Roll Call No. 428) on October 2, 2002. It was received in the Senate on October 3, 2002. No further legislative action was taken on this measure.
Page 225 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC Segment 3 Of 9
Next Hearing Segment(4)