[Senate Hearing 117-275]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                         S. Hrg. 117-275

                          PENDING LEGISLATION

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

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                              COMMITTEE ON
                      ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                                   on


			S. 2232         S. 3428
			S. 2302         S. 3699
			S. 2733         H.R. 3119
			S. 2896

                               __________

                             MARCH 1, 2022

                               __________


                       Printed for the use of the
               Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
               COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

                JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia, Chairman
RON WYDEN, Oregon                    JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington           JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont             MIKE LEE, Utah
MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico          STEVE DAINES, Montana
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii              LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine            JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada       JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma
MARK KELLY, Arizona                  BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana
JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado       CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
                                     ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas

                      Renae Black, Staff Director
                      Sam E. Fowler, Chief Counsel
                 Brie Van Cleve, Senior Energy Advisor
             Richard M. Russell, Republican Staff Director
              Matthew H. Leggett, Republican Chief Counsel
      Justin Memmott, Republican Deputy Staff Director for Energy
                           
                           
                           C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                   Page
Manchin III, Hon. Joe, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from West 
  Virginia.......................................................     1
Barrasso, Hon. John, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from 
  Wyoming........................................................     3

                                WITNESS

Richmond, Hon. Geraldine, Under Secretary for Science and 
  Innovation, 
  U.S. Department of Energy......................................     4

          ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

Barrasso, Hon. John:
    Opening Statement............................................     3
    Map showing EPSCoR-eligible jurisdictions....................    32
Manchin III, Hon. Joe:
    Opening Statement............................................     1
Richmond, Hon. Geraldine:
    Opening Statement............................................     4
    Written Testimony............................................     7
    Responses to Questions for the Record........................    44

                                ----------
                                
The text for each of the bills that were addressed in this hearing can 
be found at: https://www.energy.senate.gov/hearings/2022/3/full-
committee-hearing-to-consider-pending-legislation

 
                          PENDING LEGISLATION

                              ----------                              


                         TUESDAY, MARCH 1, 2022

                                       U.S. Senate,
                 Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m. in 
Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Joe Manchin 
III, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.

          OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOE MANCHIN III, 
                U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA

    The Chairman. Before we turn to the legislation before us 
today, I want to take a moment to acknowledge Russia's invasion 
of Ukraine and how Putin has used energy as a weapon to gain 
leverage over our European allies. One thing that has not been 
talked about as much is that during this time of war, the 
United States is still importing more than a half a million 
barrels per day of crude oil and other petroleum products from 
Russia, with imports up over 20 percent in 2021 over 2020. To 
me, it makes no sense at all for us to rely on energy from a 
country that is actively engaging in acts of war against a 
freedom-seeking democracy in Ukraine, when we were blessed with 
abundant energy resources right here in America. There is no 
reason why the United States should not be totally energy 
independent, or at the very least, trading with our allies 
where we need to. This is the only way to ensure our energy 
security. It is hypocritical for us to ask others to do what we 
can do for ourselves--and that is asking the OPEC+, if you 
will--when it comes to producing energy that we and our allies 
need.
    It is time for the Administration to take strong action to 
unleash American energy, up to and including banning Russian 
oil imports at a time when they are attacking our allies. Our 
oil and gas industry partners also need to come to the table 
and do the right thing for our country and the consumers that 
rely on their product. We are going to continue talking about 
these issues in the coming days and weeks because energy 
security and energy independence must be top-of-mind for all of 
us.
    But for today, our hearing will focus on seven energy 
bills, five of which are bipartisan. Our agenda is short today, 
in large part because we did a lot of good work earlier in this 
Congress, and many of my colleagues' bills were included in 
whole or in part in the Bipartisan Infrastructure bill. The 
bills on the agenda today pertain to advancing the Department 
of Energy's cutting-edge research and development programs and 
infrastructure, as well as relating to managing Department of 
Energy funds, functions, and authorities. I would like to thank 
my colleague, Senator Barrasso, for working with me on two of 
these bills--the DOE Science for the Future Act, together with 
Senators Durbin and Blackburn, and also the Fission for the 
Future Act. The DOE Science for the Future Act authorizes 
fundamental research and development activities performed by 
scientists at the Department of Energy, the National Labs, 
universities, and private companies to advance our 
understanding of the atom, the cell, the Earth system, and the 
universe. These scientific endeavors involve the most advanced 
scientific instruments in the world, from the fastest computers 
to the brightest light sources, and so much more. The Office of 
Science is a critical piece of the United States' ability to 
advance human knowledge of the sciences, and in carrying out 
the mission, it advances a critical and ultimately non-partisan 
aspect of our society. We also expanded the ways the DOE's 
Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research--or 
EPSCoR for short--can support universities in states like mine, 
West Virginia, and Wyoming and New Mexico and many others to 
boost our competitive research capabilities everywhere, not 
just in elite schools.
    West Virginia is one of 24 EPSCoR states, most of which are 
represented on this Committee, where EPSCoR funds have been 
critical for advancing fundamental university research, 
including at our own West Virginia University. The House 
included their version of an Office of Science authorization in 
the America COMPETES bill, and we look forward to working out 
any differences there might be in conference soon so that the 
China package can get to the President's desk. The House bill 
also included Senator Lujan's bill, which is on our agenda 
today, to fund deferred maintenance, infrastructure needs, and 
updates for our National Labs. I appreciate Senator Lujan's 
leadership on the National Labs and his partnership in ensuring 
they are treated as the crown jewels that they are of our 
nation's research and innovation ecosystem.
    I would also like to bring attention to the Fission for the 
Future Act, which Ranking Member Barrasso and I introduced in 
December. The bill directs the Secretary to work with 
communities or with retiring or retired fossil generation 
facilities to determine the feasibility of constructing 
advanced nuclear power plants. This bill is an important 
building block to assist in the economic revitalization of 
communities providing reliable baseload electricity and 
opportunities to attract industry to produce advanced 
materials, hydrogen, and other non-electric applications. Less 
than a month ago, my home state of West Virginia finally 
repealed the state ban on nuclear power. I strongly supported 
this move, in part because of the energy transition that has 
begun over the last few decades and continues to take place. We 
must be thinking about how to continue providing baseload 
power. Nuclear is an obvious choice, especially with the 
advanced technologies that hold such promise, and for shuttered 
coal plant sites that are already connected to the grid, it 
just makes common sense. So I look forward to discussing this 
bill today.
    With that, I am going to turn to my colleague, Senator 
Barrasso, for his opening remarks.

           OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING

    Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, 
and like you, before I turn to the subject of today's hearings, 
I want to say a few words about Ukraine. I would like to make 
it clear that this Committee stands with the people in the 
country of Ukraine. We condemn Russia's invasion in the 
strongest possible terms. Mr. Chairman, as you said yesterday, 
the United States can and must ramp up domestic energy 
production and increase access to our abundant resources and 
technologies to both protect our energy independence and 
support our allies around the globe. And we in the minority 
stand ready to ensure that our NATO allies and Ukraine have 
access to abundant American energy. We in the minority are 
ready to support additional exports of liquefied natural gas, 
of crude oil, of coal, and uranium from the United States. The 
United States has the energy resources to help our allies 
reduce their dependence on Russian energy. The United States 
has the energy resources to empower our allies to take tougher 
action against Russia. We have the energy resources to improve 
our economy and reduce inflation here at home. We just need the 
political wheel here in Washington to make that happen.
    Now I will turn to my remarks for the hearing.
    Mr. Chairman, today we are going to consider seven bills 
related to the Department of Energy. I will limit my comments 
to the three bills which I have introduced and co-sponsored. 
The first is S. 2302, a bill to ensure that the Assistant 
Secretary will lead the Department's Office of Cybersecurity, 
Energy Security, and Emergency Response. In March of last year, 
I, along with a bipartisan group of Senators on this Committee, 
wrote to the Secretary urging her to assign an Assistant 
Secretary to lead the Office of Cybersecurity. We explained 
that the last administration assigned an Assistant Secretary to 
head this office. We also explained that the role of the office 
would be diminished if a Senate-confirmed official did not lead 
it. Two months later, criminal hackers based in Eastern Europe 
stole data which led to the shutdown of the Colonial Pipeline. 
The shutdown caused gasoline and diesel fuel shortages. Prices 
spiked along the East Coast. More recently, the FBI and the 
Department of Homeland Security warned Americans to expect 
cyberattacks from Russian-backed actors. We were warned again--
the Senators were--last night by the Chairman of the Department 
of Homeland Security. Despite these developments, the President 
has not nominated an Assistant Secretary to lead the 
Cybersecurity Office. The Department's latest reorganization 
plan also indicates we will not get such a nominee. My bill, 
with Senator Risch as co-sponsor, is companion legislation to a 
bipartisan bill that has already passed the House. There is no 
good reason for the Secretary to diminish the role of 
cybersecurity in that office. It is time for the Senate to act.
    The second bill is S. 3428, Chairman Manchin's Fission of 
the Future Act. I am the lead co-sponsor of the bill. It would 
provide financial assistance to states and other entities 
seeking to deploy advanced nuclear reactors. A growing number 
of states recognize that advanced nuclear reactors are a 
critical part of our energy future. My home State of Wyoming 
will be home to TerraPower's first Natrium reactor. The State 
of Washington will host X-energy's first advanced reactor. This 
bill will help states with licensing, developing, and 
construction of these reactors and related supply chain 
infrastructure.
    I have also co-sponsored S. 3699, Senator Manchin's bill to 
reauthorize the Department's Office of Science. This bill will 
significantly expand EPSCoR, which is the Established Program 
to Stimulate Competitive Research. For decades, the Department 
has overlooked research at universities in rural states. This 
bill will help ensure that universities like the University of 
Wyoming better compete for the Department's research dollars. 
The bill also establishes new basic research programs on carbon 
and rare-earth mineral extraction, underground storage of 
carbon dioxide, as well as nuclear energy. These new programs 
will help ensure that the Office of Science is conducting 
research to promote all types of American energy. In addition, 
the bill will help address our needs and our nation's needs for 
medical isotopes. Medical isotopes play a critical role in 
diagnosis and in treating diseases like cancer. For far too 
long we have been dependent on Russia and other countries for 
our supply of these isotopes. Sanctions may jeopardize our 
supply. This bill will boost domestic production of these 
isotopes and reduce our foreign dependence. Finally, the bill 
will reduce the risk that adversaries like China will steal 
research funded by the Office of Science. The bill will impose 
penalties on funding recipients who knowingly violate the 
Department's protocols to protect American research.
    I want to thank the Chairman for his leadership and his 
willingness to work with me on two of these important bills, 
and I hope he can also join me in supporting the third. I also 
want to thank our witness, Dr. Richmond. I look forward to your 
testimony.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Barrasso.
    And now we are going to turn to our witness for today's 
hearing, the Honorable Dr. Geri Richmond, Under Secretary for 
Science and Innovation at the Department of Energy, and we want 
to welcome you back.
    You may start.

   STATEMENT OF HON. GERALDINE RICHMOND, UNDER SECRETARY FOR 
       SCIENCE AND INNOVATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

    Dr. Richmond. Thank you very much, and can I also say thank 
you for your vote of confidence in confirming me for this 
position, too. So I think I am thanking you.
    The Chairman. Now you have to prove your value.
    Dr. Richmond. Oh, I know. Now the hard stuff starts.
    [Laughter.]
    Dr. Richmond. Well, thank you also for letting me be here 
today. Distinguished members of the Committee, Chairman 
Manchin, Ranking Member Barrasso, it is with great pleasure 
that I join you today to represent the Department of Energy at 
this hearing, and particularly the Office of Science. As 
members of this Committee know, the DOE Office of Science is 
the cornerstone of the research enterprise in the United 
States. Through basic and use-inspired research, and the 
development and operation of cutting-edge tools, the Office of 
Science enables advances in areas of science and technology of 
critical importance to our economic and national security, 
including a just and equitable clean energy and climate change 
transition.
    S. 3699, to be referred to as the Department of Energy 
Science for the Future Act of 2022, recognizes and reinforces 
the importance of the Office of Science and the community of 
researchers it supports, both at DOE's National Laboratories 
and at U.S. colleges and universities, to advance all the DOE 
missions, including energy, security, and environmental 
management. At the same time, the Committee, through this 
legislation, has clearly stated the importance of the Office of 
Science in addressing a much broader range of science and 
technology challenges. These challenges include addressing the 
ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and ensuring the security of the 
Office of Science-supported research, both of which require 
close coordination with other federal departments and agencies. 
This is an ambitious bill, and I commend the Committee for its 
vision.
    S. 2232, to be referred to as the Restore and Modernize our 
National Laboratories Act of 2021, is, along with the parallel 
provisions of the DOE Science for the Future Act, a recognition 
of the foundational importance that the DOE's 17 incredible 
National Laboratories play in sustaining U.S. leadership in 
science and technology, and for tackling the most pressing 
problems of our time today. The National Laboratories are known 
internationally as powerhouses of innovation, and are a host to 
many of the world's leading capabilities for scientific 
discovery and technology development. As Secretary Granholm 
describes them, they are the nation's ``solutions factories.'' 
This complex of 17 laboratories has its origins in the 
Manhattan Project, with some of the labs entering their eighth 
decade of operation. DOE recognizes that significant investment 
is required to ensure that the DOE's laboratories are 
positioned to continue their long history of groundbreaking 
discoveries.
    I am also here today to speak to several additional bills 
of significance to the DOE. Bill S. 3428, to be referred to as 
the Fission of the Future Act of 2022, is a strong statement of 
support to the Department for continued public-private 
partnerships to advance demonstration and deployment of next-
generation nuclear power concepts. At the same time, the bill 
aligns with the Department of Energy's justice efforts with 
consideration for helping disadvantaged communities as we 
transition toward a carbon-free power sector in the decades to 
come.
    Bill number S. 2733, to be referred to as the U.S. 
Enrichment Corporation Fund Termination and Transfer Act, 
rescinds the authorization of the U.S. Enrichment Corporation--
or USEC fund--and moves the funds still in its coffers to the 
general fund of the Treasury. We look forward to working with 
Congress on this further.
    And finally, House bill 3119, to be referred to as the 
Energy Emergency Leadership Act, and S. 2302, would assign the 
Department's responsibilities in energy sector security and in 
responding to energy sector emergencies to an assistant 
secretary at the Department. Disruptions to the energy system 
in the U.S. could have a devastating consequence, and the 
Department's Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and 
Emergency Response plays an essential role in mitigating the 
risk of disruptions and responding rapidly when disruptions 
occur. Executing on this mission requires a team of 
professionals with unique training and experience needed to 
understand and mitigate the risks and respond rapidly when 
crises do occur.
    I look forward to discussing the legislation in more depth. 
Thank you for the opportunity to let me meet with you today.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Richmond follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]	
    
    The Chairman. Well, thank you. Now we will begin our 
questions.
    The Department of Energy's Office of Science and its 
National Labs bring world-class expertise, advanced facilities, 
infrastructure, and resources to address the most pressing 
challenges the United States is facing. The foundational 
scientific research conducted by the Office of Science is 
critical to developing these. However, it is important that 
technologies are allowed to progress through the research cycle 
from basic research to application and avoid the so-called 
``Valley of Death.'' So if you can, explain the DOE work to 
ensure a smooth handoff from basic science research to 
application by avoiding that valley.
    Dr. Richmond. Yes, thank you very much for that question, 
Senator Manchin, because that is what I took on the minute I 
got confirmed. These are unprecedented times for us to be able 
to make the kind of solutions that we need to make in order to 
address the climate issues and actually security issues today. 
When I came into this role, I had much more experience with the 
Office of Science, and I have spent a lot of time now 
understanding more of the applied areas. I have also been able 
to understand better this ``Valley of Death'' and what we need 
to do in order to fill that up so it can easily be passed 
across. In particular, I believe that the key players in this 
really are our DOE laboratories, because they are really the 
incubators for a lot of these activities that go from basic to 
applied. And so, especially the handoff happens much more 
easily at our laboratories.
    That said, what I have been doing in the Department of 
Energy leadership is working together to more closely align 
those program officers and leaders in the Office of Science 
with the applied areas, with weekly meetings together, with 
bringing together ways in which they can coordinate across 
programs in ways that it has never been done before. I have 
been meeting with all of the National Laboratory directors 
individually and also in groups to talk about how they can make 
this gap shorten and eventually disappear. They are all on 
board. I have also been meeting with small groups of the 
research officers from each of the National Laboratories 
because they are the ones that really have the tendrils down 
into their laboratories to understand what is going on, and 
they are right on board with this too.
    And so by working at various levels, I believe that we are 
starting to make progress in bridging these gaps, especially 
with our programs--our new Earthshots, the three that have been 
announced, and those require us to move across all the way to 
deployment. And so I have spent a lot of time with really 
talented people, working in all these areas and particularly 
the Earthshots in being able to pull people together and have 
a----
    The Chairman. How's it going? Do you feel like we are 
accomplishing?
    Dr. Richmond. Huh?
    The Chairman. Do you feel like you are accomplishing?
    Dr. Richmond. Yes, I do.
    The Chairman. Okay.
    Dr. Richmond. Actually, I do.
    The Chairman. People are coming together?
    Dr. Richmond. Yes.
    The Chairman. Okay.
    Dr. Richmond. Well, you know, you have to have a carrot and 
a stick, right?
    The Chairman. I understand.
    Let me throw this at you too. Senator Barrasso and I 
introduced the Fission for the Future Act, as you know, the 
recognition of the value of using advanced nuclear reactors to 
repurpose coal and other fossil generating plants for nuclear 
power generation. Senator Barrasso in Wyoming has one, I think, 
in the building stage, right? They are planning and building? 
Okay.
    Dr. Richmond. Yes.
    The Chairman. We just changed the law in West Virginia to 
allow this.
    Dr. Richmond. I know.
    The Chairman. I know, I am as happy as you are.
    Dr. Richmond. Oh, my goodness.
    The Chairman. Thank you. It gives all opportunities.
    So can you tell me how you all support this legislation and 
what you are doing to bring this to fruition?
    Dr. Richmond. Yes, so as the legislation highlights, there 
are some key issues for advanced nuclear outside of electric 
applications. That includes industrial decarbonization, 
hydrogen production, isotope production, desalination, more and 
more and more.
    The Chairman. Right.
    Dr. Richmond. So it is not just about energy.
    The Chairman. Correct.
    Dr. Richmond. There are all these other things going on 
too. And so what I have been doing is working both with the 
nuclear energy side in the applied areas, closely with the 
nuclear physics side to get them together and now they are 
collaborating with each other across, in order to help to 
translate, to understand, in the basic science side to 
understand what the issues are that the NE side needs to be 
able to get worked out before you can make progress. And then 
also getting them--the nuclear physics side--to look more 
carefully about how what they are doing can be related to more 
energy----
    The Chairman. If your communications people would consider 
putting out a statement saying the value chain that is 
involved, not just in electricity, but things you just talked 
about--what we can do with that reactor, the hydrogen, things 
of that sort, because there are an awful lot of applications 
and opportunities that people just don't know. They just don't 
know enough in the scientific value. So anything you can do to 
enhance that, putting a statement out, not just for my state, 
but for all states who have had a transition going on from 
their coal-fired plants into a new technology would be very, 
very helpful.
    Dr. Richmond. Great. Will do.
    The Chairman. Okay.
    Dr. Richmond. Will do.
    The Chairman. With that, we will turn to Senator Barrasso 
for his questions.
    Senator Barrasso. Well, thanks so much, Mr. Chairman.
    And following up with this, in terms of nuclear and 
uranium, you know, the United States has 93 operating 
commercial nuclear reactors. We are almost completely reliant 
on imports of uranium to fuel the reactors. About half of that 
uranium comes from Russia and its allies--Kazakhstan, 
Uzbekistan. So in 2020, Congress gave the Department $75 
million to establish a strategic uranium reserve. The 
Department has yet to purchase any uranium from U.S. producers, 
and in light of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and our interests 
in sanctioning Russia, does the Department now have any plans 
to accelerate its purchases of uranium?
    Dr. Richmond. Thank you, Senator Barrasso, for that 
question. It is certainly an urgent one today, and with this 
invasion, it has made all of these issues that we are having 
and discussions in the Department of Energy even more urgent. 
So at this point, folks in NNSA as well as in the nuclear 
energy area are looking for other sources in which we can 
partner also with our allies in this area and also different 
ways that we can get different sources of uranium so we are not 
dependent on Russia.
    I would be happy to get back to you more with details on 
that because it is a rapidly changing picture.
    Senator Barrasso. Yes, there is a sense of urgency that we 
feel, and I appreciate your interest in continuing. Thank you.
    Dr. Richmond. Yes, I am happy to get back to you on that.
    Senator Barrasso. The next issue is the advanced nuclear 
reactors. They need a specific type of fuel--high-assay low-
enriched uranium (HALEU). Currently, there are only two sources 
of high-assay low-enriched uranium. One is Russia. The other is 
the Department of Energy. So unless the Department acts 
swiftly, our advanced reactors are going to be, again, 
dependent upon Russia. It is the same urgency you talked about 
in the answer to the first question. Is the Department willing 
to produce high-assay low-enriched uranium and make it 
available for our advanced reactors?
    Dr. Richmond. Thank you again for that question, too. Life 
is changing quickly, as we speak today. But we know--we 
recognize that this--that HALEU is the fuel needed for most of 
our reactor developers to fuel their reactors, including nine 
of the ten awards under our ARDP use HALEU, like TerraPower and 
our X-energy demo projects. So the HALEU supply program, we 
realize, must address enrichment, transportation, storage, 
chemical conversion, and regulatory elements of the HALEU 
supply chain. And so the most urgent, near-term needs include 
supporting the ARDP demonstration projects--the X-energy and 
Natrium. Until recently, the prevailing assumption was that the 
initial cores of HALEU for both ARDP projects would be supplied 
by Russia, as you point out, under the provisions of the 
Russian suspension agreement administered by the Commerce 
Department.
    So NE is in partnership with NNSA programs, and is 
exploring feasible options to address this issue, but any 
solution will require a substantial and sustained source of 
government funding on the order of provisions included in the 
House-passed Build Back Better bill, with $500 million for 
HALEU supply, along with support from industry, the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, and other stakeholders. So we are 
working on it.
    Senator Barrasso. In terms of the finances, would it be 
helpful if the Department had the authority to use some of the 
money remaining in the U.S. Enrichment Corporation Fund for 
this purpose?
    Dr. Richmond. I don't know the answer to that at this 
point.
    Senator Barrasso. You can get back to me on it.
    Dr. Richmond. I would be happy to get back to you.
    Senator Barrasso. Great.
    I want to ask about research. As Under Secretary of Science 
and Innovation, you oversee the Office of Science. The Office 
of Science oversees 10 of our 17 National Laboratories. Can you 
tell us how many citizens of the People's Republic of China 
work at our National Labs?
    Dr. Richmond. Thank you for that question. I do not 
actually have the number with me. I can certainly get back to 
you on that.
    Senator Barrasso. Yes.
    I just want to point out that according to the Department, 
there are over 5,700 citizens of the People's Republic of China 
working at our U.S. National Labs. Do you know whether the 
People's Republic of China allows its citizens to have dual 
citizenship with the United States?
    They don't. It's okay. They don't.
    Just, I am concerned, because, you know----
    Dr. Richmond. Oh, no.
    Senator Barrasso [continuing]. Is there any evidence to 
suggest that the Chinese government allows its citizens to work 
at our National Labs without the government's prior knowledge 
or consent?
    Dr. Richmond. That is certainly a big concern to us and one 
that we have been working on with other agencies also in order 
to make sure that we have the strictest protocols in place in 
order to check who is working in our laboratory while also 
being careful that we are not overextending our protections and 
capturing people that really are completely innocent. So those 
are ongoing concerns, and we hope that by working with other 
agencies we can develop a procedure and protocol and strategy 
that is across all the agencies. And so the concern that we 
have with regard to this being a focus on the Office of Science 
is that it really needs to be--it is a very serious issue--but 
it needs to be taken up more broadly with the other agencies, 
and I guarantee you, that is what we are working on right now.
    Senator Barrasso. Just to end, and I will not really ask 
for your response, it is just that, you know, after our secure 
briefings last night and classified settings and concern about 
cybersecurity, it just seems to make a lot of common sense that 
the Secretary would go ahead and put into place a confirmed 
position to oversee the Office of Cybersecurity in the 
Department of Energy.
    Dr. Richmond. And I can understand your concerns for that. 
We are also concerned about making certain that we have someone 
in that position that has the qualifications to be able to 
carry out the duty. We believe that Puesh Kumar, who is in that 
position right now, is excellent in that area. We also are 
concerned about the fact that if it requires Senate 
confirmation, then it may delay our ability to have someone of 
that quality in place all the time. And so that is a concern 
for us.
    On the other hand, we know that you need to be able to 
question whether you think the person is doing the job and able 
to do that job, and we believe that you have mechanisms to be 
able to do that without them having to be confirmed. So our 
choice would be not to have that as a confirmed position, but 
it is more about the fact of having somebody in place that is 
qualified, that is continuous, and not political.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
    The Chairman. We will bring him in. We can bring him in.
    Dr. Richmond. Oh, yes.
    The Chairman. We can question him even if he's acting.
    Dr. Richmond. Yes.
    The Chairman. Sure.
    Dr. Richmond. He's really good.
    Senator Heinrich. Mr. Chairman, I want to start and just 
say a few words about what lessons we should be learning from 
Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and in particular, their 
weaponization of their hydrocarbon reserves. I certainly agree 
with you that it makes no sense to rely on Russian oil and gas. 
But the solution is not more reliance on dangerous fossil fuels 
that are driving climate change and irresponsibly imperiling 
the economic future of our children and grandchildren. The 
solution is to embrace technologies that exist today and make 
climate-imperiling fossil fuels irrelevant. Clean electricity, 
electrification--and in particular, heat pumps, can literally 
free Western Europe from the shackles of Russian oil and gas. 
And this is a path that can also neuter Russia's economic 
leverage over Western Europe and the world, and is the only 
path that really frees American consumers from the devastating 
price swings that are so inherent to hydrocarbon commodities. 
So I think we need to be spending a lot more time looking at 
how we accelerate that transition, particularly in Western 
Europe, so as to make things like Nordstream II completely 
unnecessary and we should be looking at industrial policy, 
because I believe that the United States of America should be 
manufacturing those technologies--in particular, heat pumps.
    Doctor, DOE just announced an organizational realignment to 
ensure that the Department has the structure needed to 
effectively spend the $62 billion provided in the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law and the Energy Act of 2020. Last year, you 
were sworn in as Under Secretary of Science and Energy, and 
after the reorganization, you will be Under Secretary for 
Science and Innovation. Talk to me about how your newly defined 
role fits into the Administration's larger strategy to meet the 
target of achieving net zero no later than 2050.
    Dr. Richmond. Great. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
    Senator Heinrich. And if you want to opine about heat 
pumps, you can do that too.
    [Laughter.]
    Dr. Richmond. Yes, actually we have one at home. Thank you 
very much.
    So when I came on board and got started in the position, I 
learned of this reorganization, and so, the person that held my 
position temporarily, Kathleen Hogan, is now the person that is 
sitting in the position of taking over the bill. She and I, we 
talk about being connected at the hip. We have been working 
very, very closely because she had been working a lot in the 
applied science area, not so much in the basic science area, 
and now she has moved over into that role. And we both believe 
that in order for us to succeed, that we must be working 
closely. So, for example, I sit in on biweekly briefings that 
she has with her different units. She sits in on briefings that 
happen in my space, and we work together to make sure that the 
transition from the very fundamental work is being passed all 
the way through.
    That said, you cannot just pass the knowledge and expect it 
to be launched into the deployment area without some problems 
because you discover problems that then have to come all the 
way back. So if we do not keep this string of information flow 
going back and forth, it is not going to work. And so what is 
good about the position that we are in now is, I can oversee 
the unit of the fundamental and applied while then working with 
her in the deployment area. And so we have programs that 
stretch all the way across that we all keep an eye on as well 
as those that go all the way--our Earthshots, which pretty much 
go up to the deployment. And so it is actually well-coordinated 
also because some of the people that were working in the 
applied space are now in the deployment space. So they are 
heavily connected with the people in that area also. I think it 
has just been really brilliant the way that was designed, and I 
cannot take credit for that, because I came into it. I think it 
is a really good plan.
    Senator Heinrich. I do think it is important for us to sort 
of bake that continuity into the organization of the agency 
over time because historically, we have always had the focus on 
basic R&D, but applied science--and in particular, you know, if 
we do not commercialize these technologies, we are really not 
doing our economy any favors. And so having that continuity all 
the way through the process, and having the kind of approach 
that we have seen from this Administration, even in the DOE 
Loan Office to deploy, deploy, deploy--that is where our 
constituents feel the jobs of the future, when things get 
deployed in their own communities and there is new hope and new 
jobs. So whatever you can do to bake that into the agency over 
time and really show the successes that are possible there, I 
think it will serve not only DOE, but the country in the long 
term.
    Dr. Richmond. That is the hope. That is the plan. And you 
know what is really cool about the National Labs is that some 
of those in the more applied areas have been going toward 
deployment anyway. And so it really--by I would say cementing 
that into the framework of the labs in addition to the 
Department of Energy with the deployment is--we have to do it. 
We just have to do it.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
    And now we have Senator Cassidy.
    Senator Cassidy. Thank you.
    Let me just respond a little bit to Senator Heinrich's 
point. I hope Senator Heinrich is not suggesting that we don't 
attempt to increase oil and gas production in the immediate 
near-term in order to help the Europeans and ourselves off the 
dependence upon Russia, denying Russia the income they need to 
fund Putin's war machine. We can all agree that long-term, 
there are things we must do, but near-term, it is clear that 
what we must do is increase supply of oil and gas to take away 
the volatility of the pricing that is resulting because of 
Putin's war. I will just make that point.
    Dr. Richmond, you clearly bring enthusiasm to your job, so 
I appreciate that. Thank you very much.
    I would like to focus right now on the Coastal Zone 
Research Initiative of the Office of Science Reauthorization 
for just a minute. And as you might imagine--I am from 
Louisiana--the Gulf Coast is one of the regions highlighted, 
and the program's direction is to enhance the understanding of 
coastal ecosystems. The direction is to develop models to 
analyze the ecological, biogeochemical, hydrological, physical, 
and human processes that interact in coastal zones. When I look 
at your bio, it seems as if this would be something that you 
have an interest in. And I spoke about this concept to Dr. 
Berhe during her nomination. Question: how can the work under 
the Coastal Zone Research Initiative be used to better 
understand the carbon storage value of coastal zones and 
wetlands? And related, what other programs in this 
reauthorization could be used to establish carbon sequestration 
values of ecosystem restoration?
    By the way we are told, there needs to be a kind of dollar 
value, if you will, related to the net amount of carbon 
sequestration that would result with coastal restoration. So it 
seems as if that science has to be developed so that if we 
wanted a negative carbon offset, everybody would be sure about 
the values that we are using. Now, I will turn it back to you.
    Dr. Richmond. Well, you know, our coastal areas--your 
region of the country--are just incredibly important, and I 
think that in terms of what we are doing in the Office of 
Science and BER is addressing exactly where you want to go with 
this. Let me say that what we need to do more of, and we are 
currently working on, is improving our computational models to 
be able to predict things in the future. And this is really 
important. And so tying in our BER activities with regard to 
soils and coastal issues, along with our computational methods 
that are in ASCR, are allowing us to develop models that can 
give us predictive values for not only cost, but also damaging 
effects of climate change on our ecosystem in these areas. So 
this is a really----
    Senator Cassidy. Now, let me ask, because what I am 
specifically told is that there has to be some sort of, ``oh 
yes, this is the net amount of carbon that would be sequestered 
if you rebuild a hectare of coastline.'' How far along are we 
in terms of establishing that model?
    Dr. Richmond. So this is not my area of expertise. It is 
more Dr. Berhe's, but I would be happy to get back to you on 
that issue.
    Senator Cassidy. Sounds great. Let me ask you about 
something else. I have been very interested in the use of 
blockchain and artificial intelligence in order to track 
emissions and other such things, and the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure bill can trace its energy provisions back to 
this Committee's actions last summer, which included requiring 
DOE to publish a study within a year of the use of digital 
tools in analyzing and addressing climate change and the 
impacts. Are you aware of the study? And do you anticipate the 
Office of Science contributing to the report considering its 
extensive history in AI, supercomputing, and other digital 
needs?
    Dr. Richmond. In that area, I do believe that the Office of 
Science is working very hard on this, particularly the ASCR 
area, but on the other hand, I do not know the state of that 
report right now. But I would be happy to get back to you on 
the details of that.
    Senator Cassidy. Sounds great. And then, let me just kind 
of talk about carbon oxide sequestration research and the 
geologic computing initiative. The proposed legislation would 
continue to invest in the research into computing that can 
identify pore spaces for carbon sequestration. How can the 
increased funding help us to better understand and, if you 
will, transfer the EPA to help expedite the permitting and 
siting of carbon sequestration wells?
    Dr. Richmond. Well, I think any progress that we make with 
regards to increasing our computational capacity using AI, and 
particularly to increase our capabilities for resolutions so 
that we can actually be looking at specific areas in order to 
do the predictions, is very important. And I know that that is 
not only in the Office of Science, but it has also been 
instituted at a number of our different National Laboratories. 
They put that as very much as a priority with regards to being 
able to do those simulations to do the predictions. And this is 
a work in progress, you know, the Office of Science is doing 
very basic research to build up this capacity. And so it is 
sort of flying the plane while you are building it, but we are 
trying to get as many results out as we can while we are also 
building that plane. So stay tuned.
    Senator Cassidy. Thank you, Dr. Richmond. I yield.
    Senator Barrasso [presiding]. Senator Cortez Masto.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. Dr. Richmond, it is great 
to see you. Thank you for joining us.
    Let me ask you this: in your written testimony, you touched 
on some of the values and opportunities that increased funding 
for EPSCoR could provide the Department and our country 
overall. And you reiterated the Department's commitment to 
ensuring that the next generation of scientists and engineers 
are more inclusive and diverse. So can you please speak to 
existing workforce needs in the energy sector as well as the 
ways that DOE is currently seeking to enhance geographic 
diversity in research through initiatives like EPSCoR?
    Dr. Richmond. Well, thank you for that question. EPSCoR is 
a really, really important program, and the Office of Science 
has a long history, as you probably know, of supporting 
research at institutions represented and in the federal R&D 
landscape, including HBCUs and other minority-serving 
institutions through EPSCoR. It also recognizes the great value 
to increase the competitiveness of underrepresented 
institutions, of which we have many really good ones, and is 
committed to increasing financial assistance to them, including 
those in EPSCoR-eligible jurisdictions.
    What I find when I go talk at institutions that don't have 
much federal funding, and many of them are in EPSCoR states 
that I have, in my career--a lot of the problem is that the PIs 
at the--the faculty at those institutions--oftentimes are an 
institution that don't have the resources to put together a 
research office, or the research office is pretty limited, so 
their ability to get knowledge on how to apply for grants and 
how to get the funding and the kind of grantsmanship you need 
to do can be holding them back. And so what the Office of 
Science has been doing--and DOE in general, in these COVID 
times in particular, is having many webinars in order to reach 
out to them. So it is not only the money, but it is being able 
to recruit and capture those that have the ideas but are afraid 
to apply, or they apply once and they get turned down and then 
they quit, which, anyone that is experienced at this knows that 
you get turned down a lot and you just keep doing it.
    And so I think it is a combination of being able to have 
funding in our EPSCoR state institutions but also to be able to 
get the knowledge to them and encouragement. And I think many 
of our program officers in the Office of Science are very good 
at this. It's just that we can always improve and be better. 
But I think it is important for the institutions also to 
recognize, to kind of push their PIs to keep trying, because we 
are merit based. We make decisions based on merit in addition 
to making certain that we are funding diverse institutions in 
other parts of the country besides just the Bay area of Boston 
and Boston in general.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Well, as an EPSCoR state, I agree 
with you wholeheartedly.
    Let me ask you this, because S. 3699 provides important 
funding for EPSCoR programs, and do you think that the grants 
that are opportunities in this legislation as well as the 
fellowships will help to enhance and further promote diversity 
in STEM?
    Dr. Richmond. Well, let me just give you what we have now 
in terms of 2021--the total support to universities in EPSCoR-
eligible jurisdictions was $125 million in the Office of 
Science, or 12 percent of the total support to provide it to 
universities, and $25 million of that total was provided 
through the DOE EPSCoR program. So we already give a lot of 
money to our universities in EPSCoR states that do not come 
through the regular EPSCoR program. So what I do have concerns 
about is establishing a quota in terms of a number that we need 
to meet for a percentage of the total research funding because 
that would not be compatible with our principles of merit-based 
allocation of research funding, but also it would take a big 
chunk out of our merit-based research funding that is already 
tight for funding. So I think a balanced approach and 
continuing to work and to find more of those institutions in 
EPSCoR states where we can pull more people in is important, 
but I'm not so keen on sort of a quota that's there.
    But I do think that we have a lot of incredibly talented 
young people in our EPSCoR states that are in remote areas at 
small colleges and universities. And I believe that one of the 
most important priorities is that we have to grab them--they 
are actually in our summer internships that we have at our DOE 
laboratories. I hear stories all the time about someone, like 
myself, that came from a fairly remote part of Kansas 
originally, and went to a DOE lab in college and so be it, here 
I am. So I am passionate about making certain that we are 
grabbing the talent that is out there, giving those--can I call 
them kids?--the confidence that they can be successful to be 
full participants because we critically need them right now 
like we have never needed them before.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Yes, thank you. Dr. Richmond, thank 
you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Senator Cortez 
Masto.
    Senator Lankford.
    Let's see if Senator Lankford is coming. If we don't hear 
from him, I know he is online and has been participating.
    Let me ask you while we are getting Senator Lankford lined 
up. Specifically on medical isotopes, you know, medical 
isotopes are elements which doctors use to diagnose and treat 
diseases like cancer. As you know, the United States is 
dependent on other countries, including Russia, for most 
medical isotopes. If we lose access to these isotopes, American 
lives could be lost--said that we need to stop relying on 
Russia for uranium. I asked about that earlier. I think the 
same can be said for medical isotopes. Will you discuss how our 
bill improves our nation's ability to produce medical isotopes?
    Dr. Richmond. Thank you for that question. It is really 
important. It is a really important bill, and we fully support 
it because that is absolutely true. These isotopes are so key 
to a lot of the things that we do in medicine and other things. 
So anything that we can do to reduce our dependence in this 
area as well as in a lot of the critical materials is urgent, 
and unfortunately, it was urgent before, but now people 
understand how urgent it needs to be as we are looking to limit 
the sources of some of these from other countries.
    Senator Barrasso. I would like to ask you a bit about 
EPSCoR because both Senator Manchin and I come from states that 
qualify, as a number of the other Senators--members of this 
Committee--do. This has become an interesting topic of concern 
of people here and, you know, Congress created this program--
the Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research--to 
broaden the geographic distribution of federal research 
funding. There are about 25 EPSCoR states, 15 of which are 
represented on this Committee.
    Dr. Richmond. I know.
    Senator Barrasso. We have a map right here. Nevada, right 
there. You know, New Mexico, Oklahoma--that is this Committee.
    [Map showing EPSCoR-eligible jurisdictions follows:]
    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]	
    
    Dr. Richmond. A lot of great states. A lot of great states.
    Senator Barrasso. And with great institutions. Great 
opportunities.
    Dr. Richmond. And great institutions too, I agree.
    Senator Barrasso. Yes. So less than two percent of the 
Office of Science's research budget goes to universities in all 
of these states. Less than two percent for universities in 25 
states when we take a look at the money, and Senator Cortez 
Masto, who is here, has been part of those discussions. Is it 
fair to say that the Office of Science can and should do more 
to build research capacity at research universities in these 
EPSCoR states?
    Dr. Richmond. Well, we need to do as much as we can to 
build that. I need to check into--I have to trust you on the 
two-percent number because I am not aware of that number, but 
if that is the case, then it would cause me concern too. That 
said, I will take it back to the Office of Science and we will 
talk about that more and get back to you.
    Senator Barrasso. Yes, because when you talked about your 
history and where you are now, but where you came from.
    Dr. Richmond. I know. I know. And I love those states. I 
have been to all of them. Okay, I love those states, even 
Nevada, I do, I do. So I get it.
    Senator Barrasso. And a follow-up--the Office of Science 
has six advisory committees which collectively include a total 
of 133 members. Of those 133 members, only nine come from 
universities in EPSCoR states--nine of the 133 from those 25 
states. Notably, these six advisory committees include just as 
many members from outside of the United States as members from 
universities in the EPSCoR states. So what is the Office of 
Science doing to include more members from universities in 
EPSCoR states on its advisory committees?
    Dr. Richmond. Good question. Thank you for asking that. I 
think, in terms of having advisory board members from--having 
been on one of those committees and chair of it a number of 
years ago, I understand to some degree how they are put 
together. I think it is important for us to have international 
folks that are on it, but I agree with you. Thank you for those 
statistics because I was not aware of those and so I will go 
back with that message because I think it is really important 
that we have representation from the EPSCoR states on it.
    Senator Barrasso. And part of the role of committees, as 
the chairman and I continue to say, is sometimes we actually 
really want the answer, and other times it is to just bring the 
level of understanding of what is happening out there and what 
we see and what we hear about at home to the attention of 
people who are in positions of influence in the various 
administrations. So thank you.
    Dr. Richmond. And these committees help to set the agenda 
for the particular division of the Office of Science. So it is 
important, and particularly so I take your message back because 
it is important that there is that view there and also the fact 
that many of your states are very diverse racially, and we want 
to make sure that that is represented in the committees too.
    Senator Barrasso. Senator Cortez Masto.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
    Let me talk a little bit about quantum computing.
    Dr. Richmond. Sure.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Yes. In your written testimony, you 
underscored existing efforts to further secure the nation's 
economic and national security through this area, and 
researchers, right now, at the University of Nevada Reno, the 
Argonne National Lab, and Pacific Northwest National Lab, they 
received $2.5 million in grants from the DOE to develop a 
center that designs molecules for QIS applications. From your 
perspective, how would the DOE Science for the Future Act, or 
any of the legislation that we are talking about today, build 
on partnerships like this to ensure that the U.S. continues to 
be a world leader in fostering new technologies such as quantum 
superposition? I am curious--your thoughts?
    Dr. Richmond. So that is really a great question, and what 
a hot topic these days and a very competitive topic too with 
other countries, particularly China. So in this realm of 
quantum computing, one of the really hard issues--and I think 
the funding that went to your state is to address this issue--
is the materials. So, you know, when we have normal computers, 
we have the silicon chip and it has been etched and got bits 
and so forth, and with quantum we have qubits. I am not going 
to go into all the details, nor do you need to know the 
details. All you need to know is that what is really hard--the 
big challenge in quantum computing--is that what you have 
there, the material you have there to work with has to be so 
pristine and perfect with almost--well, no defects because 
defects kill the qubits, and that takes incredible materials 
science. Now today, the model system that is used are 
diamonds--fabricated diamonds, right? Because they can be in a 
crystalline form that the number of--can we say potholes?--in 
there are pretty small.
    And so developing materials that can be so incredibly pure 
and structured so that they do not kill off--if I can say 
that--the qubits, is really important. And so it is a huge 
effort in materials science, but it also is, you know, a lot 
having to do with lasers and intense lasers and short-pulse 
lasers and so forth involved too, but in my mind, it is really 
this issue of the materials, and we have seen some really cool 
research come out lately. I believe one study from Argonne 
actually is showing some progress in some carbide material, and 
I get very excited about that because it gets us closer. I 
cannot remember if it was five seconds or five minutes that the 
qubit lasted, but it is still making progress. So it is really 
important that we have all-hands-on-deck--people that are 
interested and qualified working on this because it is in a 
very discovery mode before we can move forward in the quantum 
area. And that means, in many respects, that discovery mode 
means you can be doing it at a lot of different places as long 
as you are capable to be able to test things, like you have 
your collaboration with Argonne, to be able to test out what 
you are----
    Senator Cortez Masto. And so would you say, for that 
reason, it is important for Congress or us to come to the table 
with the research and development continuing because of the 
opportunities we have here, and it is at the beginning stages 
and we need to continue that development in research. Correct?
    Dr. Richmond. That is right.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Yes.
    Dr. Richmond. But I would say that in a lot of areas, 
whether it be carbon capture or hydrogen or any of those areas 
or, you know, when you are talking about critical minerals, a 
real problem is separating those critical minerals, whether 
they be rare earths, from the dirt, you know, and separating it 
with great purity. And there has just been this cool study that 
came out this past week where at Lawrence Livermore National 
Lab, a group is using a bacterial protein to grab on to rare 
earths and separate them rather than the cost of chemicals you 
usually use. I mean, is that like too cool? And it really is, 
because it is just a new way of thinking about things. It is a 
discovery that somebody from Penn State was involved in, too.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Well, Dr. Richmond, I just have to 
say, it is such a pleasure as well to see your passion and 
enthusiasm for the job and the opportunities around what we are 
talking about in science. So thank you. Thank you for, again, 
answering the questions and being here today as well.
    Dr. Richmond. Great.
    Senator Barrasso. Senator Hickenlooper.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Dr. Richmond, what a pleasure.
    Dr. Richmond. Good to see you.
    Senator Hickenlooper. I believe, according to Mark Kelly, I 
am the only scientist, which is to say I had a couple articles 
published as a geologist in peer reviewed journals, so Senator 
Kelly refers to himself as an engineer, which I would argue 
with. I think there are several of us.
    Dr. Richmond. I like to think that we are all scientists at 
some level.
    Senator Hickenlooper. One hopes, if being a scientist is 
careful observation of the world around us and using those 
observations as the foundation for better life, then yes, I 
hope we all are.
    The Restore and Modernize our National Laboratories Act 
calls out for the Office of Science as the specific recipient 
of at least one-sixth of the bill's funding.
    Dr. Richmond. Yes.
    Senator Hickenlooper. And I certainly--obviously Colorado 
has a lot of labs, a number of energy labs.
    Dr. Richmond. It does.
    Senator Hickenlooper. I am a big fan. But also, I see no 
reason why other agencies that oversee labs should not also get 
called out to make sure that we integrate and allocate properly 
all the funding for research and that we are getting the 
maximum benefit and synergy by that integrated funding. So do 
you see any harm in requiring minimum amounts of funding for 
other DOE agencies in addition to the Office of Science?
    Dr. Richmond. You know, this is an important issue because 
right now we need to be--in my mind, there is a lot of 
interesting research going on right now, but there are also 
some really urgent things that we need to do, and the Office of 
Science has a big role, but so do the applied labs, like in 
your state with NREL. And so I do not, we would have to go, I 
mean, I have to--just getting started with this, I need to 
understand whether there is--what the minimum should be, but 
all I can say is we need to have all the labs, whatever funding 
can permit, to be able to do what they need to get done in 
order to work through these fundamental and applied issues as 
we go to the deployment.
    Senator Hickenlooper. I couldn't agree more, but I will 
keep following it because I do think that we have to figure out 
how we are going to integrate and coordinate all the different 
funding that we do through the Federal Government.
    Dr. Richmond. Yes.
    Senator Hickenlooper. I was pleased to see the inclusion of 
the emerging biological threat preparedness research initiative 
within the Office of Science in the DOE Science for the Future 
Act. I think this is exactly what pandemic preparedness is all 
about, something I have certainly been speaking about for close 
to a year now. If this bill is enacted, how will DOE prioritize 
the initiative and work with private sector researchers on the 
R&D efforts?
    Dr. Richmond. Well, you know, they have already made 
contacts with industry. So, for example, let me give you a good 
example, and that is, do you realize that for most all drugs 
that are commercially created, put out on the market, they have 
to have an X-ray structure of the crystal structure of it, 
right? Where are they going to do that? Right? Where are you 
going to do that? You have to do that at a DOE light source. 
Who else has a light source? NIH doesn't have a light source. 
We have the light sources, right? Right?
    Senator Hickenlooper. Sure.
    Dr. Richmond. So when you think about the fact that we have 
already been connecting with companies in that area, in 
addition to the COVID-related issues, which they are continuing 
to work on now, but it is really, you know, what I find really 
exciting, since I have been around a while, so when I reflect 
back on the Office of Science when I was chair of BESAC many 
years ago, it was sort of, ``ooh, got to stay away from the 
biological stuff because NIH does that stuff.'' And although 
you could tinker in it, there was a fear that that would be 
looked at as a redundancy, when actually, it is a true 
partnership today with regards to working with other agencies 
through the BRaVE initiative as well as with companies. And the 
sense of the freedom that I see now of the Office of Science 
being willing and happy to start working with industry in order 
to help them along as well as get the ideas of what discoveries 
still need to be done is a transformation that, again, I 
welcome and I have been so happy to see that in my few months 
that I have been on the post.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Great. Perfect.
    If you talk to almost any lead researcher in basic science 
today, they will tell you--or at least they tell me--that too 
much of their time is occupied with paperwork--filling out 
forms, not the research aspect. I have heard concerns from both 
university institutions in Colorado and other states, but as 
well in some of the agency labs that the research security 
requirements in this bill that we are talking about could add 
to that requirement of time substantially. And I think we do 
have to balance our need for security with freeing up our 
scientists to do what they do best, which is think, discuss, 
and innovate. So would DOE support taking a more holistic 
interagency approach to this overall topic so that we could 
maybe streamline some of what the reporting requirements are?
    Dr. Richmond. Well, that is exactly where we are going. 
That is exactly where we are going because we cannot afford to 
have people wasting their talent on the fact that this agency 
does something different than this agency does and this agency. 
Now, most people that are funded to do their science cannot 
survive on one grant. They have two or three. In my program, I 
always had two or three. And there is paperwork associated with 
each of those and there are rules associated with each of 
those. And so now with the security issues, you also have to 
have practices in place that are different for all three. It is 
not going to work and people are going to figure out how to get 
through, you know, wiggle their way through the, you know, the 
lowest barrier. So I think it is really important that the 
agencies are working together, and that is what we are doing, 
is trying to work across agencies.
    As you may recall, I served on the National Science Board, 
before I took this position, for ten years, and they understand 
this issue too.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Right.
    Dr. Richmond. Absolutely.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Well, if we can be of any help, 
obviously, I think I speak for many senators when I say that we 
would work diligently to try and systematize and integrate all 
those reporting requirements.
    Dr. Richmond. We will take your help. We will take your 
help because it really does need to be agency-wide. It needs to 
be agency-wide.
    Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you. I yield.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
    Senator Lankford.
    Senator Lankford. Senator Barrasso, thank you. I do want to 
associate myself as well with the opening comments that you and 
the Chairman both made today on our energy and our 
responsibility and what's happening in Ukraine right now and to 
Europe. They are in need of energy resources quickly, and I 
know while there have been comments of some to say let's do 
some work so that we can provide resources for them in the next 
10 to 15 years, they cannot wait for the next 10 to 15 years. 
They need some help right now. And so if there is research in 
ways--if there are permitting changes that can be done to be 
able to increase the capacity for the United States to be able 
to provide energy there, that would be very, very helpful.
    I also wanted to be able to say there are several good 
bills that are in this dialogue today, but one of them is just 
what I would affectionately call a nuisance bill. It is a bill 
where Congress wrote up whistleblower protections for the 
Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. We 
thought we made it pretty clear, and some creative attorneys 
are now reinterpreting it and saying no, the whistleblower 
protections are not the same in that. And so we are providing 
clarity to be able to make sure there are whistleblower 
protections there in the way the text is actually written to 
make it very, very clear that this is what we intended to be 
able to provide. And so we are working our way through that.
    Dr. Richmond. Well, that is great. That is great to hear--
--
    Senator Lankford. Glad to be able to get that. Glad to be 
able to get that.
    Senator Barrasso made a comment as well earlier, just about 
the lack of variety in locations for investment. There is a 
bill obviously that we are dealing with today as well that says 
not less than 10 percent of the research funding goes to the 
set of states where they get very little research funding in 
the days ahead. My concern is that that becomes a ceiling 
rather than a floor. And so I would only encourage us, as we 
get this implemented, to be able to make sure it doesn't become 
that no more than 10 percent goes to those states and the other 
90 percent will get it since the vast majority of these other 
institutions get it.
    My question to you really is to be able to follow up on 
some of the things that Senator Barrasso was talking about as 
well. I mean, that is the actual advisory committees and the 
selection groups that actually select where grants are going to 
go. It seems interesting to me that there seems to be, in many 
of these selection groups for grants, a group of folks that, 
let's say, eight of the ten of them graduated from Harvard or 
Berkeley or wherever it may be and Stanford, and then 
amazingly, the research grant goes to that university as well, 
disproportionately. And so it ends up, I understand, they have 
a loyalty where they came from. They have a lot of 
relationships with faculty there and they trust the research 
that is coming out of there, but we have to find not only ways 
to be able to increase variety in the advisory groups, but also 
increase variety in the actual selection of where grant dollars 
go and how we are actually investing those dollars, not just 
the state that they are from, because we may have a variety of 
states.
    Dr. Richmond. Yes.
    Senator Lankford. But the same institutions end up getting 
the investment research dollars over and over again when there 
are other institutions around the country that also have 
creative ideas, and as you know very well from science, there 
is a great benefit to getting new ideas into the mix rather 
than the same group circling around the same research again.
    Dr. Richmond. Thank you, Senator Lankford, for those 
comments because they are very thoughtful. Let me say just a 
few things about that. The advisory boards themselves, they are 
not really so intimately involved in making the decisions about 
where the grants go, that really falls on the program officer 
getting reviews from a contingent of reviewers.
    Senator Lankford. Right.
    Dr. Richmond. And those, I have to say, that those 
reviewers are usually from quite a diverse group of 
institutions. And the Office of Science works very hard at 
that. The National Science Foundation works very hard at that 
too.
    Getting enough reviewers to do all this work is always a 
challenge. And so what I recommend when I go visit smaller 
institutions that have less research, what I recommend is to 
have faculty in those other institutions volunteer to be on 
those committees because the program officer is delighted to 
see someone volunteer because that is where you learn how the 
process works. That is how you could put input on other 
institutions like yourself. So it is really one where we have 
to make sure that--and I do believe that we are doing a good 
job of that. It is just that even if you have people on the 
committee that are from a wide distribution of institutions, 
you know, they are going to see a place like MIT and say ``woo 
hoo,'' and versus you know, another institution. So they have 
to not have biases that way too.
    Senator Lankford. Right.
    Dr. Richmond. And so you increasingly are seeing agencies, 
including the DOE, talk about not only conflict of interest, so 
you have to declare any conflict of interest----
    Senator Lankford. Right.
    Dr. Richmond [continuing]. But also get away from these 
biases that are so inherent in what we are doing. Now, can I 
tell you one more thing? And that is that what is amazing is 
that we recently did a study with regard to mentorship of 
graduate students in chemistry of the top hundred chemistry 
departments in the country. What is the quality of mentoring of 
your graduate students that is done there? Broke it up into the 
top ten rated by how much money they get and so forth. So who 
do you think got rated the worst in terms of mentorship? Top 
ten.
    So we need to have a way, and that then goes to retention. 
So we need to have a way, and this is what I am really working 
on, we need to have a way for universities to report what their 
retention rate is of their graduate students and the 
demographics of those graduate students so we can identify 
which institutions are doing the best job at mentoring 
students. The ones that are up here--50 to 100--are doing a 
much better job.
    Senator Lankford. Right.
    Dr. Richmond. Smaller groups, more attention. Now, that is 
just for chemistry, but I think it is things like that we need 
to put into place to have those that are in the other, you 
know, rated higher, rated, you know, you know, lower, you know, 
the number, that they get recognized for really putting out 
good students and mentoring them because that is the retention 
that is going to fuel what we are doing.
    Senator Lankford. Right. That is why I raised the issue on 
the advisory committees and the selection groups, because what 
I want to follow up on is what Senator Barrasso was saying. The 
advisory committees are important, but if it is the same group 
of folks making the selections over and over again, they are 
going to return grants back to the same locations where they 
have relationships--they visited it, they were there last year 
to be able to see what happened, they talked to those folks 
that were there last year, and they know they are doing good 
work and so they continue to accelerate dollars there. You are 
right. There is good work going on in lots of other places. 
They just don't know it. And so it is expanding that, whether 
that is creating rotations, whether that is creating term 
limits for those individuals, they can only do it for X number 
of years. And I have talked to folks in the research area, and 
they say well, we cannot do that because there is a limited 
number of people, but there are folks all around the country, 
it is just a matter of recruiting them and knowing that there 
is going to be an opening and getting more faculty to be able 
to step up and be able to volunteer to be able to engage with 
it.
    I agree with both. I am just saying it is putting in the 
structure to be able to make sure that we do break this cycle.
    Dr. Richmond. Yes.
    Senator Lankford. To look at more research in more places.
    Dr. Richmond. Yes, but I do think that in the Office of 
Science we do work very hard at that. I mean, I have been down 
here and now up here and so I have seen things go through. 
Everything can be improved. You can always improve things. But 
on the other hand, I feel very good about the commitment of the 
program officers that I have worked with over the years to 
really put together a diverse team of reviewers, and it is also 
age, right? Because the younger people that get on those review 
panels, they learn how the system works, right? And so even the 
age demographics are really important.
    Senator Lankford. Thank you.
    Senator Barrasso. Senator Kelly.
    Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for 
holding this hearing today. Dr. Richmond, thank you for 
testifying.
    Today, as you know, we are facing a serious microchip 
shortage all across the country--the planet, in fact. At the 
same time, China is working very hard to outcompete American 
leadership in microchip research and development. To address 
these challenges, I worked with Republicans and Democrats to 
negotiate a $52 billion plan to boost American microchip 
manufacturing. This plan passed both the Senate and the House 
and is headed to conference, which is a good thing. But I 
believe we have to do more, including within DOE, we must 
ensure that the next generation of microchips are designed and 
manufactured right here in the United States, not somewhere 
else. And if anyone can engineer a solution to the challenge of 
continuing to fit more circuits on a chip, I am confident that 
it is going to be American scientists and American engineers. 
And I understand that DOE National Laboratories have existing 
microelectronics research programs, but they do not have 
explicit authorization from Congress, and I am working on a 
bill to fix that. My bill would also promote workforce training 
and technology transfer programs at DOE. I encourage the 
Administration to support my bill once it is introduced.
    Dr. Richmond, how could Congressional authorization for 
microelectronics research and development programs at the 
Department of Energy support and accelerate work already being 
done by the Department?
    Dr. Richmond. Well, thank you, Senator, for that question 
because that is a biggie, and that is an important one, and it 
is urgent. It is urgent. You know, for decades the Department 
of Energy has been on the leading edge of microelectronics, 
both as a consumer as well as an engine of scientific discovery 
in this area. And DOE supports a robust research portfolio on 
issues at their scientific facilities, as well as chemical, 
physical, mathematical, computer science--all of these areas in 
modeling and simulations. We have been on the forefront there. 
But we need to have more funding in order to make this happen.
    So you know, when you talk about in areas of--because it's 
the whole range--it's materials science, it's chemistry, it's 
processing, it's fabrication. And it goes all the way from the 
very fundamental research to actually putting it in your 
computer or whatever, your phone or whatever it is and that is 
what the laboratories have in place right now. It is a matter 
of being able to fuel that with more funding, but smart 
funding. Smart funding that really goes after the key issues 
that we have to get at in order to pack more stuff on that 
chip. But you know, there is something that is so important to 
understand with regards to microelectronics, and you probably 
understand this, and that is there are no longer 
microelectronics, like micron-size, they are nanoelectronics, 
right?
    Senator Kelly. Right.
    Dr. Richmond. And so you are talking about, you know, if 
you are going to put this roadmap on your chip, you know and 
pack stuff in there, that you have to be working on this teeny 
tiny scale. So how are you going to do etching? How are you 
going to do all of this is if you do not have the tools to be 
able to figure out whether you are doing it and what it looks 
like after you did it? And so what is really cool in this 
particular area is our big light source facilities, for 
example. They are able to see what your ``etch'' looks like. 
They are able to then--and so the companies go in and can test 
some procedure in order to do their chip. Then they can go to 
the facility, check out what happened, and go back and forth 
with the facility. There is no place else that you can do that 
but at the DOE labs.
    But in this case, it just means being able to have more 
collaborative efforts with industry because having a consortia 
of industry would work really well that way. And so beefing 
that up too, because they, you know, they are coming in to use 
the facilities, and having staffing to be able to help them 
with it. So there is just a lot of stuff going on for testbeds 
as well as taking it all the way. It is----
    Senator Kelly. Well, yes, we want to fix that. And we want 
to make sure that we are not going to be testing our chips over 
in China as well.
    Dr. Richmond. You bet.
    Senator Kelly. And, I mean, I do not think folks realize 
this but the chip in this phone, it is a square centimeter, two 
and a half billion transistors on it--two and a half billion. 
We need to get that to five billion, but it needs to be made 
here in the United States.
    Dr. Richmond. Yes.
    Senator Kelly. Not somewhere else, and that is why the 
CHIPS Act and, you know, the legislation just making us more 
competitive with China is going to go a long way to bringing a 
lot of this manufacturing capability back to the United States. 
We have to get this across the finish line. We have TSMC--the 
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company--building right now 
a fabrication facility in Arizona. Intel is building two that 
are going to be underway soon. And this is going to help us get 
back toward--might not get us the whole way--but we went from 
40 percent of chip production, global supply of chips that we 
manufacture, down to about 12 percent today. We have to reverse 
that. But more than that, we have to be making the best chips 
in the world.
    Dr. Richmond. And we have to be on the innovation front in 
terms of the next stage. What is the next stage and can we beat 
everybody else to it? And what does concern me is that in China 
you have all these--so we have our laboratories and they are 
aging, right? And we need the infrastructure to build them up 
because China is building all new laboratories, modeled after 
ours, including our light sources and other facilities, and 
they are all going to be brand new. So it is going to take a 
bit to build it, but you know, we have to be competitive. Our 
capabilities and our laboratories have to be competitive and 
stay competitive in order to be ahead all the time.
    Senator Kelly. And then, Dr. Richmond, then we need the 
scientists and engineers to work in these facilities. So we 
need to encourage STEM education starting at a very young age 
and help young people get the education they need for these 
good-paying jobs.
    Dr. Richmond. Absolutely true, but we need to do something 
else, too, and that is that we need to make sure that going 
into graduate programs, they can afford to go to graduate 
school. So right now, graduate stipends that we offer are 
basically minimum wage. I just saw Target saying it is going to 
pay 25 bucks an hour to work at Target. That is more than we 
are paying our graduate students in their 20's doing the best 
research in the world, and we are asking them to work 80 hours 
a week making basically minimum wage. We have to get those 
stipends across and through all agencies up to at least 45K a 
year. We have to do that. And it is particularly important for 
our underrepresented minority students because a lot of times 
they come to graduate school with debt and they cannot afford 
to stay in graduate school. The retention rate is much lower 
for them and for women too.
    And so we have to figure out how to keep them in there, but 
also pay them a decent wage so that they can spend their 20's 
maybe saving a little bit of money, or maybe having a couple of 
kids too, you know, like normal in your 20's because you can 
afford to do that. So I am just passionate about that issue, 
too, because I think we just cannot afford to do this anymore.
    Senator Kelly. Well, thank you, and I yield back the two 
minutes extra I took.
    Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Senator Kelly. And 
thank you, Dr. Richmond. We are very grateful for your time and 
the excitement that you bring to the office. The enthusiasm is 
notable and appreciated.
    Members are going to have until the close of business 
tomorrow to submit additional questions for the record. And if 
there is nothing else, this Committee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:20 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                      APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

                              ----------                              

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]	

                                   [all]