Title I — Maximizing Basic Research

114th Congress · Approved Jan 6, 2017 · 130 Stat. 2969

TITLE I Maximizing Basic Research

SEC. 101. Reaffirmation of Merit-Based Peer Review.

(a)

Sense of Congress.— It is the sense of Congress that—

(1)

sustained, predictable Federal funding of basic research is essential to United States leadership in science and technology;

(2)

the Foundation’s intellectual merit and broader impacts criteria are appropriate for evaluating grant proposals, as concluded by the 2011 National Science Board Task Force on Merit Review;

(3)

evaluating proposals on the basis of the Foundation’s intellectual merit and broader impacts criteria should be used to assure that the Foundation’s activities are in the national interest as these reviews can affirm that—

(A)

the proposals funded by the Foundation are of high quality and advance scientific knowledge; and

(B)

the Foundation’s grants address societal needs through basic research findings or through related activities; and

(4)

as evidenced by the Foundation’s contributions to scientific advancement, economic growth, human health, and national security, its peer review and merit review processes have identified and funded scientifically and societally relevant basic research and should be preserved.

(b)

Merit Review Criteria.— The Foundation shall maintain the intellectual merit and broader impacts criteria, among other specific criteria as appropriate, as the basis for evaluating grant proposals in the merit review process.

(c)

Updates.— If after the date of enactment of this Act a change is made to the merit-review process, the Director shall submit a report to the appropriate committees of Congress not later than 30 days after the date of the change.

SEC. 102. Transparency and Accountability.

(a)

Findings.—

(1)

building the understanding of and confidence in investments in basic research is essential to public support for sustained, predictable Federal funding;

(2)

the Foundation has improved transparency and accountability of the outcomes made through the merit review process, but additional transparency into individual grants is valuable in communicating and assuring the public value of federally funded research; and

(3)

the Foundation should commit to transparency and accountability and to clear, consistent public communication regarding the national interest for each Foundation-awarded grant and cooperative agreement.

(b)

Guidance.—

(1)

In general.— The Director of the Foundation shall issue and periodically update, as appropriate, policy guidance for both Foundation staff and other Foundation merit review process participants on the importance of transparency and accountability to the outcomes made through the merit review process.

(2)

Requirements.— The guidance under paragraph (1) shall require that each public notice of a Foundation-funded research project justify the expenditure of Federal funds by—

(A)

describing how the project—

(i)

reflects the statutory mission of the Foundation, as established in the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (42 U.S.C. 1861 et seq.); and

(ii)

addresses the Foundation’s intellectual merit and broader impacts criteria; and

(B)

clearly identifying the research goals of the project in a manner that can be easily understood by both technical and non-technical audiences.

(c)

Broader Impacts Review Criterion Update.— Section 526(a) of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 1862p–14(a)) is amended to read as follows:

“(a) Goals.—The Foundation shall apply a broader impacts review criterion to identify and demonstrate project support of the following goals:

“(1) Increasing the economic competitiveness of the United States.

“(2) Advancing of the health and welfare of the American public.

“(3) Supporting the national defense of the United States.

“(4) Enhancing partnerships between academia and industry in the United States.

“(5) Developing an American STEM workforce that is globally competitive through improved pre-kindergarten through grade 12 STEM education and teacher development, and improved undergraduate STEM education and instruction.

“(6) Improving public scientific literacy and engagement with science and technology in the United States.

“(7) Expanding participation of women and individuals from underrepresented groups in STEM.”

SEC. 103. Epscor Reaffirmation and Update.

(a)

Findings.— Section 517(a) of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 1862p–9(a)) is amended—

(1)

in paragraph (1)—

(A)

by striking “ The National” and inserting “ the National”; and

(B)

by striking “ education,” and inserting “ education”;

(2)

in paragraph (2), by striking “ with 27 States” and all that follows through the semicolon at the end and inserting “ with 28 States and jurisdictions, taken together, receiving only about 12 percent of all National Science Foundation research funding;”;

(3)

by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:

“(3) each of the States described in paragraph (2) receives only a fraction of 1 percent of the Foundation’s research dollars each year;”

; and

(4)

by adding at the end the following:

“(4) first established at the National Science Foundation in 1979, the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (referred to in this section as ‘EPSCoR’) assists States and jurisdictions historically underserved by Federal research and development funding in strengthening their research and innovation capabilities;

“(5) the EPSCoR structure requires each participating State to develop a science and technology plan suited to State and local research, education, and economic interests and objectives;

“(6) EPSCoR has been credited with advancing the research competitiveness of participating States, improving awareness of science, promoting policies that link scientific investment and economic growth, and encouraging partnerships between government, industry, and academia;

“(7) EPSCoR proposals are evaluated through a rigorous and competitive merit-review process to ensure that awarded research and development efforts meet high scientific standards; and

“(8) according to the National Academy of Sciences, EPSCoR has strengthened the national research infrastructure and enhanced the educational opportunities needed to develop the science and engineering workforce.”

(b)

Sense of Congress.—

(1)

In general.— It is the sense of Congress that—

(A)

since maintaining the Nation’s scientific and economic leadership requires the participation of talented individuals nationwide, EPSCoR investments into State research and education capacities are in the Federal interest and should be sustained; and

(B)

EPSCoR should maintain its experimental component by supporting innovative methods for improving research capacity and competitiveness.

(2)

Definition of epscor.— In this subsection, the term “EPSCoR” has the meaning given the term in section 502 of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 1862p note).

(c)

Award Structure Updates.— Section 517 of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 1862p–9) is amended by adding at the end the following:

“(g) Award Structure Updates.—In implementing the mandate to maximize the impact of Federal EPSCoR support on building competitive research infrastructure, and based on the inputs and recommendations of previous EPSCoR reviews, the head of each Federal agency administering an EPSCoR program shall—

“(1) consider modifications to EPSCoR proposal solicitation, award type, and project evaluation—

“(A) to more closely align with current agency priorities and initiatives;

“(B) to focus EPSCoR funding on achieving critical scientific, infrastructure, and educational needs of that agency;

“(C) to encourage collaboration between EPSCoR-eligible institutions and researchers, including with institutions and researchers in other States and jurisdictions;

“(D) to improve communication between State and Federal agency proposal reviewers; and

“(E) to continue to reduce administrative burdens associated with EPSCoR;

“(2) consider modifications to EPSCoR award structures—

“(A) to emphasize long-term investments in building research capacity, potentially through the use of larger, renewable funding opportunities; and

“(B) to allow the agency, States, and jurisdictions to experiment with new research and development funding models; and

“(3) consider modifications to the mechanisms used to monitor and evaluate EPSCoR awards—

“(A) to increase collaboration between EPSCoR-funded researchers and agency staff, including by providing opportunities for mentoring young researchers and for the use of Federal facilities;

“(B) to identify and disseminate best practices; and

“(C) to harmonize metrics across participating Federal agencies, as appropriate.”

(d)

Reports.—

(1)

Congressional reports.— Section 517 of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 1862p–9), as amended, is further amended—

(A)

by striking subsection (c);

(B)

by redesignating subsections (d) through (g) as subsections (c) through (f), respectively;

(C)

in subsection (c), as redesignated—

(i)

in paragraph (1), by striking “ Experimental Programs to Stimulate Competitive Research” and inserting “ EPSCoR”; and

(ii)

in paragraph (2)—

(I)

in subparagraphs (A) and (E), by striking “ EPSCoR and Federal EPSCoR-like programs” and inserting “ each EPSCoR”;

(II)

in subparagraph (D), by striking “ EPSCoR and other Federal EPSCoR-like programs” and inserting “ each EPSCoR”;

(III)

in subparagraph (E), by striking “ EPSCoR or Federal EPSCoR-like programs” and inserting “ each EPSCoR”; and

(IV)

in subparagraph (G), by striking “ EPSCoR programs” and inserting “ each EPSCoR”; and

(D)

by amending subsection (d), as redesignated, to read as follows:

“(d) Federal Agency Reports.—Each Federal agency that administers an EPSCoR shall submit to Congress, as part of its Federal budget submission—

“(1) a description of the program strategy and objectives;

“(2) a description of the awards made in the previous fiscal year, including—

“(A) the total amount made available, by State, under EPSCoR;

“(B) the total amount of agency funding made available to all institutions and entities within each EPSCoR State;

“(C) the efforts and accomplishments to more fully integrate the EPSCoR States in major agency activities and initiatives;

“(D) the percentage of EPSCoR reviewers from EPSCoR States; and

“(E) the number of programs or large collaborator awards involving a partnership of organizations and institutions from EPSCoR and non-EPSCoR States; and

“(3) an analysis of the gains in academic research quality and competitiveness, and in science and technology human resource development, achieved by the program over the last 5 fiscal years.”

; and

(E)

in subsection (e)(1), as redesignated, by striking “ Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research or a program similar to the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research” and inserting “ EPSCoR”.

(2)

Results of award structure plan.— Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the EPSCoR Interagency Coordinating Committee shall brief the appropriate committees of Congress on the updates made to the award structure under 517(f) of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 1862p–9(f)), as amended by this subsection.

(e)

Definition of EPSCoR.—

(1)

In general.— Section 502 of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 1862p note) is amended by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:

“(2) EPSCoR.—The term ‘EPSCoR’ means—

“(A) the Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research established by the Foundation; or

“(B) a program similar to the Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research at another Federal agency.”

(2)

Technical and conforming amendments.— Section 113 of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 1862g) is amended—

(A)

in the heading, by striking “ experimental” and inserting “ established”;

(B)

in subsection (a), by striking “ an Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research” and inserting “ a program to stimulate competitive research (known as the ‘Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research’)”; and

(C)

in subsection (b), by striking “ the program” and inserting “ the Program”.

SEC. 104. Cybersecurity Research.

(a)

Foundation Cybersecurity Research.— Section 4(a)(1) of the Cyber Security Research and Development Act, as amended (15 U.S.C. 7403(a)(1)) is amended—

(1)

in subparagraph (O), by striking “ and” at the end;

(2)

in subparagraph (P), by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and

(3)

by adding at the end the following:

“(Q) security of election-dedicated voting system software and hardware; and

“(R) role of the human factor in cybersecurity and the interplay of computers and humans and the physical world.”

(b)

NIST Cybersecurity Priorities.—

(1)

Critical infrastructure awareness.— The Director of NIST shall continue to raise public awareness of the voluntary, industry-led cybersecurity standards and best practices for critical infrastructure developed under section 2(c)(15) of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 272(c)(15)).

(2)

Quantum computing.— Under section 2(b) of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 272(b)) and section 20 of that Act (15 U.S.C. 278g–3), the Director of NIST shall—

(A)

research information systems for future cybersecurity needs; and

(B)

coordinate with relevant stakeholders to develop a process—

(i)

to research and identify or, if necessary, develop cryptography standards and guidelines for future cybersecurity needs, including quantum-resistant cryptography standards; and

(ii)

to provide recommendations to Congress, Federal agencies, and industry consistent with the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–113; 110 Stat. 775), for a secure and smooth transition to the standards under clause (i).

(3)

Federal information systems research and development.— Section 20(d)(3) of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278g–3(d)(3)) is amended to read as follows:

“(3) conduct research and analysis—

“(A) to determine the nature and extent of information security vulnerabilities and techniques for providing cost-effective information security;

“(B) to review and determine prevalent information security challenges and deficiencies identified by agencies or the Institute, including any challenges or deficiencies described in any of the annual reports under section 3553 or 3554 of title 44, United States Code, and in any of the reports and the independent evaluations under section 3555 of that title, that may undermine the effectiveness of agency information security programs and practices; and

“(C) to evaluate the effectiveness and sufficiency of, and challenges to, Federal agencies’ implementation of standards and guidelines developed under this section and policies and standards promulgated under section 11331 of title 40, United States Code;”

(4)

Voting.— Section 2(c) of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 272(c)) is amended—

(A)

by redesignating paragraphs (16) through (23) as paragraphs (17) through (24), respectively; and

(B)

by inserting after paragraph (15) the following:

“(16) perform research to support the development of voluntary, consensus-based, industry-led standards and recommendations on the security of computers, computer networks, and computer data storage used in election systems to ensure voters can vote securely and privately.”

SEC. 105. Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Update.

(a)

Short Title.— This section may be cited as the “Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Modernization Act of 2016”.

(b)

Findings.— Section 2 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5501) is amended—

(1)

in paragraphs (2) and (5), by striking “ high-performance computing” and inserting “ networking and information technology, including high-performance computing,”; and

(2)

in paragraph (3), by striking “ high-performance computing” and inserting “ networking and information technology, including high-performance computing”;

(c)

Purposes.— Section 3 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5502) is amended—

(1)

in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “ high-performance computing” and inserting “ networking and information technology”;

(2)

in paragraph (1)—

(A)

in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking “ expanding Federal support for research, development, and application of high-performance computing” and inserting “ supporting Federal research, development, and application of networking and information technology”;

(B)

in subparagraph (A), by striking “ high-performance computing” both places it appears and inserting “ networking and information technology”;

(C)

by striking subparagraphs (C) and (D);

(D)

by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:

“(C) stimulate research on and promote more rapid development of high-end computing systems software and applications software;”

(E)

by redesignating subparagraphs (E) through (H) as subparagraphs (D) through (G), respectively;

(F)

in subparagraph (D), as redesignated, by inserting “ high-end” after “ the development of”;

(G)

in subparagraphs (E) and (F), as redesignated, by striking “ high-performance computing” each place it appears and inserting “ networking and information technology”; and

(H)

in subparagraph (G), as redesignated, by striking “ high-performance” and inserting “ high-end”; and

(3)

in paragraph (2)—

(A)

by striking “ high-performance computing and” and inserting “ networking and information technology and”; and

(B)

by striking “ high-performance computing network” and inserting “ networking and information technology”.

(d)

Definitions.— Section 4 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5503) is amended—

(1)

by striking paragraphs (3) and (5);

(2)

by redesignating paragraphs (1), (2), (4), (6), and (7) as paragraphs (2), (3), (5), (8), and (9), respectively;

(3)

by inserting before paragraph (2), as redesignated, the following:

“(1) ‘cyber-physical systems’ means physical or engineered systems whose networking and information technology functions and physical elements are deeply integrated and are actively connected to the physical world through sensors, actuators, or other means to enable safe and effective, real-time performance in safety-critical and other applications;”

(4)

in paragraph (3), as redesignated, by striking “ high-performance computing” and inserting “ networking and information technology”;

(5)

by inserting after paragraph (3), as redesignated, the following:

“(4) ‘high-end computing’ means the most advanced and capable computing systems, including their hardware, storage, networking and software, encompassing both massive computational capability and large-scale data analytics to solve computational problems of national importance that are beyond the capability of small- to medium-scale systems, including computing formerly known as high-performance computing;”

(6)

by inserting after paragraph (5), as redesignated, the following:

“(6) ‘networking and information technology’ means high-end computing, communications, and information technologies, high-capacity and high-speed networks, special purpose and experimental systems, high-end computing systems software and applications software, and the management of large data sets;

“(7) ‘participating agency’ means an agency described in section 101(a)(3)(C);”

; and

(7)

in paragraph (8), as redesignated, by striking “ National High-Performance Computing Program” and inserting “ Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Program”.

(e)

Title I Heading.— The heading of title I of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5511 et seq.) is amended by striking “ HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING” and inserting “ NETWORKING AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY”.

(f)

Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Program.— Section 101 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5511) is amended—

(1)

in the section heading, by striking “ national high-performance computing program” and inserting “ networking and information technology research and development program”;

(2)

in subsection (a)—

(A)

in the subsection heading, by striking “ National High-Performance Computing Program” and inserting “ Networking and Information Technology Research and Development”;

(B)

in paragraph (1)—

(i)

in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking “ National High-Performance Computing Program” and inserting “ Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Program”;

(ii)

in subparagraph (A), by striking “ high-performance computing, including networking” and inserting “ networking and information technology”;

(iii)

in subparagraphs (B) and (G), by striking “ high-performance” each place it appears and inserting “ high-end”;

(iv)

in subparagraph (C), by striking “ high-performance computing and networking” and inserting “ high-end computing, distributed, and networking”;

(v)

by amending subparagraph (D) to read as follows:

“(D) provide for efforts to increase software security and reliability;”

(vi)

in subparagraph (H)—

(I)

by inserting “ support and guidance” after “ provide”; and

(II)

by striking “ and” after the semicolon;

(vii)

in subparagraph (I)—

(I)

by striking “ improving the security” and inserting “ improving the security, reliability, and resilience”; and

(II)

by striking the period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and

(viii)

by adding at the end the following:

“(J) provide for increased understanding of the scientific principles of cyber-physical systems and improve the methods available for the design, development, and operation of cyber-physical systems that are characterized by high reliability, safety, and security;

“(K) provide for research and development on human-computer interactions, visualization, and big data;

“(L) provide for research and development on the enhancement of cybersecurity, including the human facets of cyber threats and secure cyber systems;

“(M) provide for the understanding of the science, engineering, policy, and privacy protection related to networking and information technology;

“(N) provide for the transition of high-end computing hardware, system software, development tools, and applications into development and operations; and

“(O) foster public-private collaboration among government, industry research laboratories, academia, and nonprofit organizations to maximize research and development efforts and the benefits of networking and information technology, including high-end computing.”

(C)

in paragraph (2)—

(i)

by amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:

“(A) establish the goals and priorities for Federal networking and information technology research, development, education, and other activities;”

(ii)

by amending subparagraph (C) to read as follows:

“(C) provide for interagency coordination of Federal networking and information technology research, development, education, and other activities undertaken pursuant to the Program—

“(i) among the participating agencies; and

“(ii) to the extent practicable, with other Federal agencies not described in paragraph (3)(C), other Federal and private research laboratories, industry, research entities, institutions of higher education, relevant nonprofit organizations, and international partners of the United States;”

(iii)

by amending subparagraph (E) to read as follows:

“(E) encourage and monitor the efforts of the agencies participating in the Program to allocate the level of resources and management attention necessary to ensure that the strategic plans under subsection (e) are developed and executed effectively and that the objectives of the Program are met; and”

; and

(iv)

in subparagraph (F), by striking “ high-performance” and inserting “ high-end”; and

(D)

in paragraph (3)—

(i)

by redesignating subparagraphs (B), (C), (D), and (E) as subparagraphs (C), (D), (E), and (G), respectively;

(ii)

by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:

“(B) provide a detailed description of the nature and scope of research infrastructure designated as such under the Program;”

(iii)

in subparagraph (C), as redesignated—

(I)

by amending clause (i) to read as follows:

“(i) the Department of Justice;”

(II)

by redesignating clauses (vii) through (xi) as clauses (viii) through (xii), respectively;

(III)

by inserting after clause (vi) the following:

“(vii) the Department of Homeland Security;”

; and

(IV)

by amending clause (viii), as redesignated, to read as follows:

“(viii) the National Archives and Records Administration;”

(iv)

in subparagraph (D), as redesignated—

(I)

by striking “ is submitted,” and inserting “ is submitted, the levels for the previous fiscal year,”; and

(II)

by striking “ each Program Component Area;” and inserting “ each Program Component Area and research area supported in accordance with section 102;”;

(v)

by amending subparagraph (E), as redesignated, to read as follows:

“(E) describe the levels of Federal funding for each participating agency, and for each Program Component Area, for the fiscal year during which such report is submitted, the levels for the previous fiscal year, and the levels proposed for the fiscal year with respect to which the budget submission applies;”

; and

(vi)

by inserting after subparagraph (E), as redesignated, the following:

“(F) include a description of how the objectives for each Program Component Area, and the objectives for activities that involve multiple Program Component Areas, relate to the objectives of the Program identified in the strategic plans required under subsection (e); and”

(3)

in subsection (b)—

(A)

in paragraph (1), in the matter preceding subparagraph (A)—

(i)

by striking “ high-performance computing” both places it appears and inserting “ networking and information technology”; and

(ii)

after the first sentence, by inserting the following: “ Each chair of the advisory committee shall meet the qualifications of committee membership and may be a member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.”;

(B)

in paragraph (1)(D), by striking “ high-performance computing, networking technology, and related software” and inserting “ networking and information technology”; and

(C)

in paragraph (2)—

(i)

in the second sentence, by striking “ 2” and inserting “ 3”;

(ii)

by striking “ Committee on Science and Technology” and inserting “ Committee on Science, Space, and Technology”; and

(iii)

by striking “ The first report shall be due within 1 year after the date of enactment of the America COMPETES Act.”;

(4)

in subsection (c)(1)(A), by striking “ high-performance computing” and inserting “ networking and information technology”; and

(5)

by adding at the end the following:

“(d) Periodic Reviews.—The heads of the participating agencies, working through the National Science and Technology Council and the Program, shall—

“(1) periodically assess and update, as appropriate, the structure of the Program, including the Program Component Areas and associated contents, scope, and funding levels, taking into consideration any relevant recommendations of the advisory committee established under subsection (b); and

“(2) ensure that such agency’s implementation of the Program includes foundational, large-scale, long-term, and interdisciplinary information technology research and development activities, including activities described in section 102.

“(e) Strategic Plans.—

“(1) In general.—The heads of the participating agencies, working through the National Science and Technology Council and the Program, shall develop and implement strategic plans to guide—

“(A) emerging activities of Federal networking and information technology research and development; and

“(B) the activities described in subsection (a)(1).

“(2) Updates.—The heads of the participating agencies shall update the strategic plans as appropriate.

“(3) Contents.—Each strategic plan shall—

“(A) specify near-term and long-term objectives for the portions of the Program relevant to the strategic plan, the anticipated schedule for achieving the near-term and long-term objectives, and the metrics to be used for assessing progress toward the near-term and long-term objectives;

“(B) specify how the near-term and long-term objectives complement research and development areas in which academia and the private sector are actively engaged;

“(C) describe how the heads of the participating agencies will support mechanisms for foundational, large-scale, long-term, and interdisciplinary information technology research and development and for Grand Challenges, including through collaborations—

“(i) across Federal agencies;

“(ii) across Program Component Areas; and

“(iii) with industry, Federal and private research laboratories, research entities, institutions of higher education, relevant nonprofit organizations, and international partners of the United States;

“(D) describe how the heads of the participating agencies will foster the rapid transfer of research and development results into new technologies and applications in the national interest, including through cooperation and collaborations with networking and information technology research, development, and technology transition initiatives supported by the States; and

“(E) describe how the portions of the Program relevant to the strategic plan will address long-term challenges for which solutions require foundational, large-scale, long-term, and interdisciplinary information technology research and development.

“(4) Private sector efforts.—In developing, implementing, and updating strategic plans, the heads of the participating agencies, working through the National Science and Technology Council and the Program, shall coordinate with industry, academia, and other interested stakeholders to ensure, to the extent practicable, that the Federal networking and information technology research and development activities carried out under this section do not duplicate the efforts of the private sector.

“(5) Recommendations.—In developing and updating strategic plans, the heads of the participating agencies shall solicit recommendations and advice from—

“(A) the advisory committee under subsection (b);

“(B) the Committee on Science and relevant subcommittees of the National Science and Technology Council; and

“(C) a wide range of stakeholders, including industry, academia, National Laboratories, and other relevant organizations and institutions.

“(f) Reports.—The heads of the participating agencies, working through the National Science and Technology Council and the Program, shall submit to the advisory committee, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives—

“(1) the strategic plans developed under subsection (e)(1); and

“(2) each update under subsection (e)(2).”

(g)

National Research and Education Network.— Section 102 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5512) is repealed.

(h)

Next Generation Internet.— Section 103 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5513) is repealed.

(i)

Grand Challenges in Areas of National Importance.— Title I of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5511 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

“SEC. 102. GRAND CHALLENGES IN AREAS OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE.

“(a) In General.—The Program shall encourage the participating agencies to support foundational, large-scale, long-term, interdisciplinary, and interagency information technology research and development activities in networking and information technology directed toward agency mission areas that have the potential for significant contributions to national economic competitiveness and for other significant societal benefits. Such activities, ranging from basic research to the demonstration of technical solutions, shall be designed to advance the development of fundamental discoveries. The advisory committee established under section 101(b) shall make recommendations to the Program for candidate research and development areas for support under this section.

“(b) Characteristics.—

“(1) In general.—Research and development activities under this section shall—

“(A) include projects selected on the basis of applications for support through a competitive, merit-based process;

“(B) to the extent practicable, involve collaborations among researchers in institutions of higher education and industry, and may involve nonprofit research institutions and Federal laboratories, as appropriate;

“(C) to the extent practicable, leverage Federal investments through collaboration with related State and private sector initiatives; and

“(D) include a plan for fostering the transfer of research discoveries and the results of technology demonstration activities, including from institutions of higher education and Federal laboratories, to industry for commercial development.

“(2) Cost-sharing.—In selecting applications for support, the agencies may give special consideration to projects that include cost sharing from non-Federal sources.”

(j)

National Science Foundation Activities.— Section 201 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5521) is amended—

(1)

in subsection (a)—

(A)

by striking “ (a) General Responsibilities.—”;

(B)

in paragraph (1)—

(i)

by inserting “ high-end” after “ National Science Foundation shall provide”; and

(ii)

by striking “ high-performance computing” and all that follows through “ networking;” and inserting “ networking and information technology; and”;

(C)

by striking paragraphs (2) through (4); and

(D)

by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:

“(2) the National Science Foundation shall use its existing programs, in collaboration with other agencies, as appropriate, to improve the teaching and learning of networking and information technology at all levels of education and to increase participation in networking and information technology fields, including by individuals identified in sections 33 and 34 of the Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a and 1885b).”

; and

(2)

by striking subsection (b).

(k)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Activities.— Section 202 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5522) is amended—

(1)

by striking “ (a) General Responsibilities.—”;

(2)

by striking “ high-performance computing” and inserting “ networking and information technology”; and

(3)

by striking subsection (b).

(l)

Department of Energy Activities.— Section 203 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5523) is amended—

(1)

by striking “ (a) General Responsibilities.—”;

(2)

in paragraph (1), by striking “ high-performance computing and networking” and inserting “ networking and information technology”;

(3)

in paragraph (2)(A), by striking “ high-performance” and inserting “ high-end”; and

(4)

by striking subsection (b).

(m)

Department of Commerce Activities.— Section 204 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5524) is amended—

(1)

in subsection (a)(1)—

(A)

in subparagraph (A), by striking “ high-performance computing systems and networks” and inserting “ networking and information technology systems and capabilities”;

(B)

in subparagraph (B), by striking “ interoperability of high-performance computing systems in networks and for common user interfaces to systems” and inserting “ interoperability and usability of networking and information technology systems”; and

(C)

in subparagraph (C), by striking “ high-performance computing” and inserting “ networking and information technology”;

(2)

in subsection (b)—

(A)

in the heading, by striking “ High-Performance Computing and Network” and inserting “ Networking and Information Technology”;

(B)

by striking “ Pursuant to the Computer Security Act of 1987 (Public Law 100–235; 101 Stat. 1724), the” and inserting “ The”; and

(C)

by striking “ sensitive information in Federal computer systems” and inserting “ Federal agency information and information systems”; and

(3)

by striking subsections (c) and (d).

(n)

Environmental Protection Agency Activities.— Section 205 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5525) is repealed.

(o)

Role of the Department of Education.— Section 206 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5526) is repealed.

(p)

Miscellaneous Provisions.— Section 207 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5527) is amended—

(1)

in subsection (a)(2), by striking “ paragraphs (1) through (5) of section 2315(a) of title 10” and inserting “ section 3552(b)(6)(A)(i) of title 44”; and

(2)

in subsection (b), by striking “ high-performance computing” and inserting “ networking and information technology”.

(q)

Repeal.— Section 208 of the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (15 U.S.C. 5528) is repealed.

(r)

National Science Foundation Research.— Section 4(b)(5)(K) of the Cyber Security Research and Development Act (15 U.S.C. 7403(b)(5)(K)) is amended by striking “ high-performance computing” and inserting “ networking and information technology”.

(s)

National Information Technology Research and Development Program.— Section 13202(b) of the America Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (42 U.S.C. 17912(b)) is amended by striking “ National High-Performance Computing Program” and inserting “ Networking and Information Technology Research and Development Program”.

(t)

Federal Cybersecurity Research and Development.— Section 201(a)(4) of the Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2014 (15 U.S.C. 7431(a)(4)) is amended—

(1)

by striking “ clauses (i) through (x)” and inserting “ clauses (i) through (xi)”; and

(2)

by striking “ under clause (xi)” and inserting “ under clause (xii)”.

(u)

Additional Repeal.— Section 4 of the Department of Energy High-End Computing Revitalization Act of 2004 (15 U.S.C. 5543) is repealed.

SEC. 106. Physical Sciences Coordination.

(a)

High-energy Physics.—

(1)

In general.— The Physical Science Subcommittee of the National Science and Technology Council (referred to in this section as “Subcommittee”) shall continue to coordinate Federal efforts related to high-energy physics research to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of United States investment in high-energy physics.

(2)

Purposes.— The purposes of the Subcommittee include—

(A)

to advise and assist the Committee on Science and the National Science and Technology Council on United States policies, procedures, and plans in the physical sciences, including high-energy physics; and

(B)

to identify emerging opportunities, stimulate international cooperation, and foster the development of the physical sciences in the United States, including—

(i)

in high-energy physics research, including related underground science and engineering research;

(ii)

in physical infrastructure and facilities;

(iii)

in information and analysis; and

(iv)

in coordination activities.

(3)

Responsibilities.— In regard to coordinating Federal efforts related to high-energy physics research, the Subcommittee shall, taking into account the findings and recommendations of relevant advisory committees—

(A)

provide recommendations on planning for construction and stewardship of large facilities participating in high-energy physics;

(B)

provide recommendations on research coordination and collaboration among the programs and activities of Federal agencies related to underground science, neutrino research, dark energy, and dark matter research;

(C)

establish goals and priorities for high-energy physics, related underground science, and research and development that will strengthen United States competitiveness in high-energy physics;

(D)

propose methods for engagement with international, Federal, and State agencies and Federal laboratories not represented on the National Science and Technology Council to identify and reduce regulatory, logistical, and fiscal barriers that inhibit United States leadership in high-energy physics and related underground science; and

(E)

develop, and update as necessary, a strategic plan to guide Federal programs and activities in support of high-energy physics research, including—

(i)

the efforts taken in support of paragraph (2) since the last strategic plan;

(ii)

an evaluation of the current research needs for maintaining United States leadership in high-energy physics; and

(iii)

an identification of future priorities in the area of high-energy physics.

(b)

Radiation Biology.—

(1)

In general.— The Subcommittee shall continue to coordinate Federal efforts related to radiation biology research to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of United States investment in radiation biology.

(2)

Responsibilities for radiation biology.— In regard to coordinating Federal efforts related to radiation biology research, the Subcommittee shall—

(A)

advise and assist the National Science and Technology Council on policies and initiatives in radiation biology, including enhancing scientific knowledge of the effects of low dose radiation on biological systems to improve radiation risk management methods;

(B)

identify opportunities to stimulate international cooperation and leverage research and knowledge from sources outside of the United States;

(C)

ensure coordination between the Department of Energy Office of Science, Foundation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Institutes of Health, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Defense, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and Department of Homeland Security;

(D)

identify ongoing scientific challenges for understanding the long-term effects of ionizing radiation on biological systems; and

(E)

formulate overall scientific goals for the future of low-dose radiation research in the United States.

(c)

Fusion Energy Sciences.—

(1)

In general.— The Subcommittee shall continue to coordinate Federal efforts related to fusion energy research to maximize the efficiency and effectiveness of United States investment in fusion energy sciences.

(2)

Responsibilities for fusion energy sciences.— In regard to coordinating Federal efforts related to fusion energy sciences, the Subcommittee shall—

(A)

advise and assist the National Science and Technology Council on policies and initiatives in fusion energy sciences, including enhancing scientific knowledge of fusion energy science, plasma physics, and related materials sciences;

(B)

identify opportunities to stimulate international cooperation and leverage research and knowledge from sources outside of the United States, including the ITER project;

(C)

ensure coordination between the Department of Energy Office of Science, National Nuclear Security Administration, Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Foundation, and Department of Defense regarding fusion energy sciences and plasma physics; and

(D)

formulate overall scientific goals for the future of fusion energy sciences and plasma physics.

SEC. 107. Laboratory Program Improvements.

(a)

In General.— The Director of NIST, acting through the Associate Director for Laboratory Programs, shall develop and implement a comprehensive strategic plan for laboratory programs that expands—

(1)

interactions with academia, international researchers, and industry; and

(2)

commercial and industrial applications.

(b)

Optimizing Commercial and Industrial Applications.— In accordance with the purpose under section 1(b)(3) of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 271(b)(3)), the comprehensive strategic plan shall—

(1)

include performance metrics for the dissemination of fundamental research results, measurements, and standards research results to industry, including manufacturing, and other interested parties;

(2)

document any positive benefits of research on the competitiveness of the interested parties described in paragraph (1);

(3)

clarify the current approach to the technology transfer activities of NIST; and

(4)

consider recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences.

SEC. 108. Standard Reference Data Act Update.

Section 2 of the Standard Reference Data Act (15 U.S.C. 290a) is amended to read as follows:

“SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

“For the purposes of this Act:

“(1) Standard reference data.—The term ‘standard reference data’ means data that is—

“(A) either—

“(i) quantitative information related to a measurable physical, or chemical, or biological property of a substance or system of substances of known composition and structure;

“(ii) measurable characteristics of a physical artifact or artifacts;

“(iii) engineering properties or performance characteristics of a system; or

“(iv) 1 or more digital data objects that serve—

“(I) to calibrate or characterize the performance of a detection or measurement system; or

“(II) to interpolate or extrapolate, or both, data described in subparagraph (A) through (C); and

“(B) that is critically evaluated as to its reliability under section 3 of this Act.

“(2) Secretary.—The term ‘Secretary’ means the Secretary of Commerce.”

SEC. 109. Nsf Mid-Scale Project Investments.

(a)

Findings.— Congress makes the following findings:

(1)

The Foundation funds major research facilities, infrastructure, and instrumentation that provide unique capabilities at the frontiers of science and engineering.

(2)

Modern and effective research facilities, infrastructure, and instrumentation are critical to maintaining United States leadership in science and engineering.

(3)

The costs of some proposed research instrumentation, equipment, and upgrades to major research facilities fall between programs currently funded by the Foundation, creating a gap between the established parameters of the Major Research Instrumentation and Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction programs, including projects that have been identified as cost-effective additions of high priority to the advancement of scientific understanding.

(4)

The 2010 Astronomy and Astrophysics Decadal Survey recommended a mid-scale innovations program.

(b)

Mid-scale Projects.—

(1)

In general.— The Foundation shall evaluate the existing and future needs, across all disciplines supported by the Foundation, for mid-scale projects.

(2)

Strategy.— The Director of the Foundation shall develop a strategy to address the needs identified in paragraph (1).

(3)

Briefing.— Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the Foundation shall provide a briefing to the appropriate committees of Congress on the evaluation under paragraph (1) and the strategy under paragraph (2).

(4)

Definition of mid-scale projects.— In this subsection, the term “mid-scale projects” means research instrumentation, equipment, and upgrades to major research facilities or other research infrastructure investments that exceed the maximum award funded by the major research instrumentation program and are below the minimum award funded by the major research equipment and facilities construction program as described in section 507 of the AMERICA Competes Reauthorization Act of 2010 (Public Law 111–358; 124 Stat. 4008).

SEC. 110. Oversight of Nsf Major Multi-User Research Facility Projects.

(a)

Facilities Oversight.—

(1)

In general.— The Director of the Foundation shall strengthen oversight and accountability over the full life-cycle of each major multi-user research facility project, including planning, development, procurement, construction, operations, and support, and shut-down of the facility, in order to maximize research investment.

(2)

Requirements.— In carrying out paragraph (1), the Director shall—

(A)

prioritize the scientific outcomes of a major multi-user research facility project and the internal management and financial oversight of the major multi-user research facility project;

(B)

clarify the roles and responsibilities of all organizations, including offices, panels, committees, and directorates, involved in supporting a major multi-user research facility project, including the role of the Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction Panel;

(C)

establish policies and procedures for the planning, management, and oversight of a major multi-user research facility project at each phase of the life-cycle of the major multi-user research facility project;

(D)

ensure that policies for estimating and managing costs and schedules are consistent with the best practices described in the Government Accountability Office Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide, the Government Accountability Office Schedule Assessment Guide, and the Office of Management and Budget Uniform Guidance (2 C.F.R. Part 200);

(E)

establish the appropriate project management and financial management expertise required for Foundation staff to oversee each major multi-user research facility project effectively, including by improving project management training and certification;

(F)

coordinate the sharing of the best management practices and lessons learned from each major multi-user research facility project;

(G)

continue to maintain a Large Facilities Office to support the research directorates in the development, implementation, and oversight of each major multi-user research facility project, including by—

(i)

serving as the Foundation’s primary resource for all policy or process issues related to the development, implementation, and oversight of a major multi-user research facility project;

(ii)

serving as a Foundation-wide resource on project management, including providing expert assistance on nonscientific and nontechnical aspects of project planning, budgeting, implementation, management, and oversight;

(iii)

coordinating and collaborating with research directorates to share best management practices and lessons learned from prior major multi-user research facility projects; and

(iv)

assessing each major multi-user research facility project for cost and schedule risk; and

(H)

appoint a senior agency official whose responsibility is oversight of the development, construction, and operations of major multi-user research facilities across the Foundation.

(b)

Facilities Full Life-cycle Costs.—

(1)

In general.— Subject to subsection (c)(1), the Director of the Foundation shall require that any pre-award analysis of a major multi-user research facility project includes the development and consideration of the full life-cycle cost (as defined in section 2 of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 1998 (42 U.S.C. 1862k note)) in accordance with section 14 of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2002 (42 U.S.C. 1862n–4).

(2)

Implementation.— Based on the pre-award analysis described in paragraph (1), the Director of the Foundation shall include projected operational costs within the Foundation’s out-years as part of the President’s annual budget submission to Congress under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code.

(c)

Cost Oversight.—

(1)

Pre-award analysis.—

(A)

In general.— The Director of the Foundation and the National Science Board may not approve or execute any agreement to start construction on any proposed major multi-user research facility project unless—

(i)

an external analysis of the proposed budget has been conducted to ensure the proposal is complete and reasonable;

(ii)

the analysis under clause (i) follows the Government Accountability Office Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide;

(iii)

except as provided under subparagraph (C), an analysis of the accounting systems has been conducted;

(iv)

an independent cost estimate of the construction of the project has been conducted using the same detailed technical information as the project proposal estimate to determine whether the estimate is well-supported and realistic; and

(v)

the Foundation and the National Science Board have considered the analyses under clauses (i) and (iii) and the independent cost estimate under clause (iv) and resolved any major issues identified therein.

(B)

Audits.— An external analysis under subparagraph (A)(i) may include an audit.

(C)

Exception.— The Director of the Foundation, at the Director’s discretion, may waive the requirement under subparagraph (A)(iii) if a similar analysis of the accounting systems was conducted in the prior years.

(2)

Construction oversight.— The Director of the Foundation shall require for each major multi-user research facility project—

(A)

periodic external reviews on project management and performance;

(B)

adequate internal controls, policies, and procedures, and reliable accounting systems in preparation for the incurred cost audits under subparagraph (D);

(C)

annual incurred cost submissions of financial expenditures; and

(D)

an incurred cost audit of the major multi-user research facility project in accordance with Government Accountability Office Government Auditing Standards—

(i)

at least once during construction at a time determined based on risk analysis and length of the award, except that the length of time between audits may not exceed 3 years; and

(ii)

at the completion of the construction phase.

(3)

Operations cost analysis.— The Director of the Foundation shall require an independent cost analysis of the operational proposal for each major multi-user research facility project.

(d)

Contingency.—

(1)

In general.— The Director of the Foundation shall strengthen internal controls to improve oversight of contingency on a major multi-user research facility project.

(2)

Requirements.— In carrying out paragraph (1), the Director of the Foundation shall—

(A)

only include contingency amounts in an award in accordance with section 200.433 of title 2, Code of Federal Regulations (relating to contingency provisions), or any successor regulation;

(B)

retain control over funds budgeted for contingency, except that the Director may disburse budgeted contingency funds incrementally to the awardee to ensure project stability and continuity;

(C)

track contingency use; and

(D)

ensure that contingency amounts allocated to the performance baseline are reasonable and allowable.

(e)

Use of Fees.—

(1)

Sense of congress.— It is the sense of Congress that—

(A)

the use of taxpayer-funded award fees should be transparent and explicable; and

(B)

the Foundation should implement an award fee policy that ensures more transparency and accountability in the funding of necessary and appropriate expenses directly related to the construction and operation of major multi-user research facilities.

(2)

Reporting and recordkeeping.— The Director of the Foundation shall establish guidelines for awardees regarding inappropriate expenditures associated with all fee types used in cooperative agreements, including for alcoholic beverages, lobbying, meals or entertainment for non-business purposes, non-business travel, and any other purpose the Director determines is inappropriate.

(f)

Oversight Implementation Progress.— The Director of the Foundation shall—

(1)

not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, and periodically thereafter until the completion date, provide a briefing to the appropriate committees of Congress on the response to or progress made toward implementation of—

(A)

this section;

(B)

all of the issues and recommendations identified in cooperative agreement audit reports and memoranda issued by the Inspector General of the Foundation in the last 5 years; and

(C)

all of the issues and recommendations identified by a panel of the National Academy of Public Administration in the December 2015 report entitled “National Science Foundation: Use of Cooperative Agreements to Support Large Scale Investment in Research”; and

(2)

not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, notify the appropriate committees of Congress when the Foundation has implemented the recommendations identified in a panel of the National Academy of Public Administration report issued December 2015.

(g)

Definitions.— In this section:

(1)

Appropriate committees of congress.— The term “appropriate committees of Congress” means the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives.

(2)

Major multi-user research facility project.— The term “ ‘major multi-user research facility project’ ” means a science and engineering facility project that—

(A)

exceeds the lesser of—

(i)

10 percent of a Directorate’s annual budget; or

(ii)

$100,000,000 in total project costs; or

(B)

is funded by the major research equipment and facilities construction account, or any successor account.

SEC. 111. Personnel Oversight.

(a)

Conflicts of Interest.— The Director of the Foundation shall update the policy and procedure of the Foundation relating to conflicts of interest to improve documentation and management of any known conflict of interest of an individual on temporary assignment at the Foundation, including an individual on assignment under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4701 et seq.).

(b)

Justifications.— The Deputy Director of the Foundation shall submit annually to the appropriate committees of Congress written justification for each rotator employed under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4701 et seq.), or other rotator employed, by the Foundation that year that is paid at a rate that exceeds the maximum rate of pay for the Senior Executive Service, including, if applicable, the level of adjustment for the certified Senior Executive Service Performance Appraisal System.

(c)

Report.— Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the Foundation shall submit to the appropriate committees of Congress a report on the Foundation’s efforts to control costs associated with employing rotators, including the results of and participation in the Foundation’s cost-sharing pilot program and the Foundation’s progress in responding to the findings and implementing the recommendations of the Office of Inspector General of the Foundation related to the employment of rotators.

SEC. 112. Management of the U.s. Antarctic Program.

(a)

Review.—

(1)

In general.— The Director of the Foundation shall continue to review the efforts by the Foundation to sustain and strengthen scientific efforts in the face of logistical challenges for the United States Antarctic Program.

(2)

Issues to be examined.— In conducting the review, the Director shall examine, at a minimum, the following:

(A)

Implementation by the Foundation of issues and recommendations identified by—

(i)

the Inspector General of the National Science Foundation in audit reports and memoranda on the United States Antarctic Program in the last 4 years;

(ii)

the U.S. Antarctic Program Blue Ribbon Panel report, More and Better Science in Antarctica through Increased Logistical Effectiveness, issued July 23, 2012; and

(iii)

the National Research Council report, Future Science Opportunities in Antarctica and the Southern Ocean, issued September 2011.

(B)

Efforts by the Foundation to track its progress in addressing the issues and recommendations under subparagraph (A).

(C)

Efforts by the Foundation to address other opportunities and challenges, including efforts on scientific research, coordination with other Federal agencies and international partners, logistics and transportation, health and safety of participants, oversight and financial management of awardees and contractors, and resources and policy challenges.

(b)

Briefing.— Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Director shall brief the appropriate committees of Congress on the ongoing review, including findings and any recommendations.

SEC. 113. Nist Campus Security.

(a)

Supervisory Authority.— The Department of Commerce Office of Security shall directly manage the law enforcement and site security programs of NIST through an assigned Director of Security for NIST without increasing the number of full-time equivalent employees of the Department of Commerce, including NIST.

(b)

Reports.— The Director of Security for NIST shall provide an activities and security report on a quarterly basis for the first year after the date of enactment of this Act, and on an annual basis thereafter, to the Under Secretary for Standards and Technology and the appropriate committees of Congress.

SEC. 114. Coordination of Sustainable Chemistry Research and Development.

(a)

Importance of Sustainable Chemistry.— It is the sense of Congress that—

(1)

the science of chemistry is vital to improving the quality of human life and plays an important role in addressing critical global challenges, including water quality, energy, health care, and agriculture;

(2)

sustainable chemistry can reduce risks to human health and the environment, reduce waste, improve pollution prevention, promote safe and efficient manufacturing, and promote efficient use of resources in developing new materials, processes, and technologies that support viable long-term solutions to a significant number of challenges;

(3)

sustainable chemistry can stimulate innovation, encourage new and creative approaches to problems, create jobs, and save money; and

(4)

a coordinated effort on sustainable chemistry will allow for a greater return on research investment in this area.

(b)

Sustainable Chemistry Basic Research.— Subject to the availability of appropriated funds, the Director of the Foundation may continue to carry out the Sustainable Chemistry Basic Research program authorized under section 509 of the National Science Foundation Authorization Act of 2010 (42 U.S.C. 1862p–3).

SEC. 115. Misrepresentation of Research Results.

(a)

Prohibition.— The Director of the Foundation may revise the regulations under part 689 of title 45, Code of Federal Regulations (relating to research misconduct) to ensure that the findings and conclusions of any article authored by a principal investigator, using the results of research conducted under a Foundation grant, that is published in a peer-reviewed publication, made publicly available, or incorporated in an application for a research grant or grant extension from the Foundation, does not contain any falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism.

(b)

Interagency Communication.— Upon a finding that research misconduct has occurred, the Foundation shall, in addition to any possible final action under section 689.3 of title 45, Code of Federal Regulations, notify other Federal science agencies of the finding.

SEC. 116. Research Reproducibility and Replication.

(a)

Sense of Congress.— It is the sense of Congress that—

(1)

the gold standard of good science is the ability of a researcher or research laboratory to reproduce a published research finding, including methods;

(2)

there is growing concern that some published research findings cannot be reproduced or replicated, which can negatively affect the public’s trust in science;

(3)

there are a complex set of factors affecting reproducibility and replication; and

(4)

the increasing interdisciplinary nature and complexity of scientific research may be a contributing factor to issues with research reproducibility and replication.

(b)

Report.—

(1)

In general.— Not later than 45 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the Foundation shall enter into an agreement with the National Research Council—

(A)

to assess research and data reproducibility and replicability issues in interdisciplinary research;

(B)

to make recommendations for improving rigor and transparency in scientific research; and

(C)

to submit to the Director of the Foundation a report on the assessment, including its findings and recommendations, not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.

(2)

Submission to congress.— Not later than 60 days after the date the Director of the Foundation receives the report under paragraph (1)(C), the Director shall submit the report to the appropriate committees of Congress, including a response from the Director of the Foundation and the Chair of the National Science Board as to whether they agree with each of the findings and recommendations in the report.

SEC. 117. Brain Research Through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies Initiative.

(a)

In General.— The Foundation shall support research activities related to the interagency Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies Initiative.

(b)

Sense of Congress.— It is the sense of Congress that the Foundation should work in conjunction with the Interagency Working Group on Neuroscience established by the National Science and Technology Council, Committee on Science to determine how to use the data infrastructure of the Foundation and other applicable Federal science agencies to help neuroscientists collect, standardize, manage, and analyze the large amounts of data that result from research attempting to understand how the brain functions.

Title I — Maximizing Basic Research