    [Senate Hearing 118-601]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 118-601

                       CHIPS AND SCIENCE IMPLEMENTATION
                                 AND OVERSIGHT

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

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                             COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
                          SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                OCTOBER 4, 2023

                                   __________

        Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
                                 Transportation

      GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT

                                  _______

                     U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
     59-705 PDF                WASHINGTON : 2025

                    Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov
           SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                       MARIA CANTWELL, Washington, Chair
    AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota             TED CRUZ, Texas, Ranking
    BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii                 JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
    EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts         ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
    GARY PETERS, Michigan                DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
    TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin             JERRY MORAN, Kansas
    TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois            DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
    JON TESTER, Montana                  MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
    KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona              TODD YOUNG, Indiana
    JACKY ROSEN, Nevada                  TED BUDD, North Carolina
    BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico            ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri
    JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Colorado          J. D. VANCE, Ohio
    RAPHAEL WARNOCK, Georgia             SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
    PETER WELCH, Vermont                     Virginia
                                         CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming
                       Lila Harper Helms, Staff Director
                     Melissa Porter, Deputy Staff Director
                         Jonathan Hale, General Counsel
                     Brad Grantz, Republican Staff Director
               Nicole Christus, Republican Deputy Staff Director
                         Liam McKenna, General Counsel
                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Hearing held on October 4, 2023..................................     1
    Statement of Senator Cantwell....................................     1
    Statement of Senator Cruz........................................     4
    Statement of Senator Schatz......................................    20
    Statement of Senator Tester......................................    24
    Statement of Senator Wicker......................................    26
    Statement of Senator Klobuchar...................................    28
    Statement of Senator Fischer.....................................    30
    Statement of Senator Hickenlooper................................    32
    Statement of Senator Moran.......................................    34
    Statement of Senator Lujan.......................................    36
    Statement of Senator Thune.......................................    38
    Statement of Senator Peters......................................    40
    Statement of Senator Blackburn...................................    41
    Statement of Senator Welch.......................................    43
    Statement of Senator Vance.......................................    44
    Statement of Senator Rosen.......................................    46
    Statement of Senator Schmitt.....................................    48
    Statement of Senator Markey......................................    50
    Statement of Senator Young.......................................    52
    Statement of Senator Baldwin.....................................    54
    Statement of Senator Capito......................................    55
    Statement of Senator Sinema......................................    57
    Statement of Senator Budd........................................    59
        Red Light Report by Senator Ted Cruz.........................    61

                                   Witnesses

    Hon. Gina M. Raimondo, Secretary, U.S. Department of Commerce....     6
        Prepared statement...........................................     7
    Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan, Director, National Science
      Foundation.....................................................    12
        Prepared statement...........................................    14

                                    Appendix

    Letter dated February 1, 2023 to Hon. Dr. Sethuraman
      Panchanathan, Director, National Science Foundation from United
      States Senators: Dan Sullivan, Roger F. Wicker, John Cornyn,
      and Todd Young.................................................    83
    Letter dated March 30, 2023 to Hon. Dan Sullivan from Sethuraman
      Panchanathan, Director, National Science Foundation............    85
    Letter dated October 4, 2023 to Hon. Maria Cantwell and Hon. Ted
      Cruz from Kristen Swearingen, Vice President, Legislative &
      Political Affairs, Associated Builders and Contractors.........    86
    Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
      by:
        Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    88
        Hon. Tammy Baldwin...........................................    93
        Hon. Tammy Duckworth.........................................    93
        Hon. Kyrsten Sinema..........................................    98
        Hon. Jacky Rosen.............................................    99
        Hon. Ben Ray Lujan...........................................   101
        Hon. Raphael Warnock.........................................   103
        Hon. Peter Welch.............................................   111
        Hon. Ted Cruz................................................   111
        Hon. Roger Wicker............................................   128
        Hon. Deb Fischer.............................................   130
        Hon. Jerry Moran.............................................   130
        Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................   134
        Hon. Marsha Blackburn........................................   138
        Hon. Todd Young..............................................   143
        Hon. Shelley Moore Capito....................................   146
        Hon. Cynthia Lummis..........................................   149
    Response to written questions submitted to Dr. Sethuraman
      Panchanathan by:
        Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................   152
        Hon. Tammy Baldwin...........................................   154
        Hon. Tammy Duckworth.........................................   155
        Hon. Kyrsten Sinema..........................................   158
        Hon. Jacky Rosen.............................................   158
        Hon. Ben Ray Lujan...........................................   159
        Hon. Raphael Warnock.........................................   160
        Hon. Peter Welch.............................................   167
        Hon. Ted Cruz................................................   168
        Hon. Jerry Moran.............................................   174
        Hon. Dan Sullivan............................................   177
        Hon. Marsha Blackburn........................................   178
        Hon. Todd Young..............................................   181

                       CHIPS AND SCIENCE IMPLEMENTATION
                                 AND OVERSIGHT

                                  ----------

                           WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2023

                                           U.S. Senate,
            Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:08 p.m., in
    room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Maria
    Cantwell, Chairwoman of the Committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Cantwell [presiding], Klobuchar, Schatz,
    Markey, Peters, Baldwin, Tester, Sinema, Rosen, Lujan,
    Hickenlooper, Welch, Cruz, Thune, Wicker, Fischer, Moran,
    Blackburn, Young, Budd, Schmitt, Vance, and Capito.

               OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON

        The Chair. Good afternoon. The Senate Commerce Committee,
    Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee will come to
    order.
        I thank my colleagues, who, many have been in this room for
    many hours already today, doing double duty today on both an
    Aviation Hearing, and now a very important conversation about
    the Implementation of the CHIPS and Science Act, which our
    committee played a very big role in. So needless to say, our
    committee has been working very diligently on a lot of
    transformational policy.
        While we are waiting for our colleague here, I think I will
    thank Senator Wicker, again, for his work on the CHIPS and
    Science Act. I think people may not remember, but this
    committee, I don't know how many amendments we processed, I
    know it was in the hundreds, it might have been in the three-
    hundreds. But I definitely believe that that kind of regular
    order process was good for the institution, good for the debate
    about science.
        And hopefully, people will continue, in today's hearing, to
    understand that, and understand much of the debate that maybe
    wasn't as clear, in a big public perspective, as it was to all
    of us who were working behind the scenes, daily, to try to
    figure this policy out.
        OK, we will go ahead and get started, and then when my
    colleague gets here, hopefully, he will be here soon, we will
    let him make his opening statement.
        But welcome, Secretary Raimondo; and Director ``Panch'', is
    it OK, ``Panch'', Panchanathan, thank you for being here with
    us today.
        I also want to mention that apparently, there is a FEMA
    Emergency Alert Test that is going to happen today. So if
    everybody in the room gets a big alert message, that is what
    that is about, and not to be concerned about it, but that
    everybody knows that it is going to go off.
        So a little more than a year ago, Congress passed the
    landmark CHIPS and Science Act, and it was a clear commitment
    to America's competitiveness and the idea that we need to
    innovate in the United States. And clearly, we were doing a lot
    in innovation. We were publishing a lot. But we needed to
    translate more, patent more, and really help our manufacturing
    base be competitive for the future.
        The two witnesses before us today led on the delivery of
    those commitments and are here to tell us today about the
    substantial progress their agencies are making during the first
    year of the implementation of this Act.
        We have already seen the CHIPS and Science Act spur more
    than $200 billion in private sector investment, from
    semiconductors across the country to other investments. And the
    Federal Government's role in this is so important because the
    commitment to the CHIPS Program Office within the Department of
    Congress is generating more than 500 statements of interest
    from companies looking at new projects and innovation.
        So today, we will have a chance to ask the Secretary about
    those proposals, building resiliency and a long-lasting
    semiconductor ecosystem in the United States. Since we had a
    chance to discuss this earlier, I am pretty sure we are going
    to hear today about how we are never going to be in this
    problem again as it relates to Legacy chips, that we are going
    to have a good plan to help on a supply chain development for
    that, that our DoD stature is going to continue to be on the
    cutting edge of chips.
        And I think you are going to tell us that the diversity of
    applications, the robustness of it means that the ecosystem
    that we are trying to restore and grow is alive and well.
        We have also seen NSF begin to roll out innovation engines
    with more than 43 million going to planning grants to tap
    innovation across the country. I love that the Director, during
    our efforts, basically coined the phrase ``Innovation Anywhere,
    Opportunity Everywhere,'' and I definitely think that is what
    we were looking for in this legislation, both in the spreading
    of the amount of EPSCoR funding, and in diversifying a
    workforce opportunity across the United States.
        For example, in the State of Washington, a Spokane company
    won a Regional Innovation Engine Award to advance energy and
    decarbonization. We all know that innovation and expertise
    helps us generate jobs and tackle some of our most pressing
    problems. And we know that what we have to do on this
    committee, besides hearing from these witnesses today, is push
    our colleagues to fully fund the aspects of CHIPS and Science
    that were funded.
        In fact, the Committee's two previous attempts at
    competitive bills fell short because the funding was not
    realized, one, because we faced an economic downturn, and then
    the other just in our first, very first effort on
    competitiveness also didn't make the mark from an
    appropriations perspective.
        So we know that our foreign adversaries are not waiting. We
    know that our strategic competitors are also moving ahead, and
    we need to make this investment to what we would say, ``derisk
    the supply chain'', and make sure that we are innovating and
    translating our science faster.
        As we look to the future we need to work together to ensure
    that the U.S. remains competitive in the global marketplace on
    other issues like artificial intelligence, 5G wireless systems,
    and quantum computing. And that will require the United States
    to do a couple of things: The ability of the U.S. to produce
    and produce chips to support this innovation. That is why the
    advancement and hearing where we are with the applications is
    so important.
        Second, we need a resilient supply chain that can withstand
    disruptions like we saw in the past, either geopolitical
    tensions, natural disasters, global pandemics, whatever, we
    need a more dependent supply chain, and a workforce that is
    well skilled and technical to the types of technology that are
    being produced today.
        I personally believe this is one of the biggest gaps left
    to be addressed in the CHIPS and Science Act. We have some
    money, both for semiconductor training and workforce
    advancements, and some on the science side through NSF, but a
    lot more needs to happen.
        In the United States, the jobs of tomorrow are here today,
    but the skill level of the workforce to do them is not. And so
    the more that we can take advantage of the job creation that is
    happening by marrying that up, something the Secretary knows
    from her days as Governor, the more we can streamline that and
    marry that up together, the more this engine is going to rev
    and keep effecting the U.S. economy.
        Today, U.S. manufacturers only 12 percent of the world's
    semiconductors compared to where we were in the 1990s at 30
    percent. So the question really today is, are we seeing the
    right level of investment to make a return to the market share
    that we think is important? My guess is we are going to hear
    both from the private sector investment that has already been
    made and the robust response to the programs. We are going to
    hear that the investment wants to be in the United States.
        So, I think we can't emphasize enough how important it was
    to bring this manufacturing back. Consumers saw car prices
    raise as much as 40 percent. Truck manufacturers, like PACCAR
    in my state, weren't able to get semiconductors, weren't,
    literally, able to ship product. Supply chain resiliency also
    created deadlocks for other industries, and impacted national
    security. So, I hope that we will all work together on better
    tools for the future. I will have some questions about that in
    the question-and-answer period.
        But the semiconductor industry today is facing a gap of
    67--I am sorry--67,000 people by 2030. That is just
    semiconductors. So I know we, in my state, as it relates just
    to STEM, have a gap of 60,000 workers across various sectors,
    not just semiconductors. So clearly, we need to make the
    investments in the scholarship programs and in the STEM
    Apprentices and Workforce for Tomorrow to realize all this
    investment that is now being made in the United States of
    America.
        So welcome to our witnesses. I will turn it over to my
    colleague, Senator Cruz, for his opening statement.

                      STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS

        Senator Cruz. Thank you, Madam Chair, for calling this
    important hearing. And welcome Secretary Raimondo, Director
    Panchanathan, for both being here today.
        Semiconductors drive our modern economy, from cell phones,
    and cars, to supercomputers, and medical devices. These
    integrated circuits have been integrated into our daily lives.
        Before 2020, however, when we suddenly couldn't get enough
    of them, most of us probably didn't realize just how big a role
    these chips play. It became very quickly apparent that, in
    terms of economic and national security, just how dependent and
    vulnerable we are on semiconductors. Yes, we rely on these
    chips for consumer electronics and cars, but they are also in
    just about every----
        [Interruption by emergency alert test.]
        Senator Wicker. I think your time is up, Senator.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Cruz. We have an emergency in semiconductors.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Cruz. That is a first. I believe----
        The Chair. We announced it before you got here. So sorry,
    we should have given you some indication about that.
        Senator Cruz. I think our first witness is a semiconductor.
    You are done?
        [Interruption by emergency alert test resumes.]
        Senator Cruz. No.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Cruz. As I was saying, with great trepidation, I
    observed that just about every advanced weapon system in our
    Military relies on semiconductors, and most of them are not
    made in the United States. Recognizing this, there was a flurry
    of legislative activity to onshore and near-shore semiconductor
    manufacturing last Congress, culminating in the CHIPS and
    Science Act.
        Parts of this law, like the FABS Act, which I co-sponsored
    and enthusiastically supported, provided tax credits to
    incentivize chip investments in the United States. The final
    bill, however, also included a whopping $52 billion in direct
    subsidies from taxpayers that, in my view, would predictably
    lead to government bureaucrats picking winners and losers. At
    worst, this kind of industrial policy can be rife with
    political interference and waste, and even at best, it is often
    done poorly and inefficiently.
        That is why I ultimately voted against the bill, despite it
    containing a number of things I strongly support. We are
    already seeing a number of these concerns realized. When I
    speak to companies in Texas, many of them bemoan how the Biden
    Administration has imposed extraneous nonstatutory conditions
    on receipt of taxpayer support.
        Commerce isn't just asking if you have got the best
    technology or the cheapest manufacturing process; instead, the
    bureaucrats want to know if you have proper plans to subsidize
    child care or to support affordable housing. Have you
    adequately engaged with labor unions? Are your suppliers
    sufficiently diverse? None of these topics are critical to the
    fundamental question of whether you can build the best chip at
    the lowest price.
        Maybe these issues are relevant, but does anyone think that
    officials in Washington know better than the engineers and the
    investors behind these projects? Moreover, none of these
    strings were included in the law, but they have, nonetheless
    been attached, by the Biden Administration, to try to enact by
    regulations things that they don't have the votes to pass
    through Congress.
        As many Commerce Committee Republicans noted in the letter
    that we sent to Secretary Raimondo in March, this attempt at
    backdoor progressive social policy will only serve to make
    domestic chip production more expensive, less competitive, and
    more reliant on taxpayer subsidies over private investment.
        More recently, an area of major concern has been the
    onerous environmental requirements under NEPA, and the
    potential for this environmental process law to drive up
    compliance costs for manufacturers and significantly slow new
    construction. That is why Senator Mark Kelly and I led a
    bipartisan amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act
    to exclude from NEPA the overwhelming majority of chips-funded
    semiconductor projects.
        Secretary Raimondo, I want to thank you for your support on
    that effort, and for explicitly endorsing our amendment during
    your House testimony last month. Secretary Raimondo, we have
    also had good conversations about the importance of a strong
    U.S. chip industry. We both want to see America's innovative
    capacity soar, and we agree that using these taxpayer funds,
    appropriately, is immensely challenging.
        Fortunately, states like Texas are showing us a path
    forward here. Texas boasts an established ecosystem of
    innovators, world-class universities, low taxes, and a
    permissive regulatory environment that enables companies to
    grow and to thrive. As a result, we have already attracted $61
    billion in private, new semiconductor investments, and created
    over 8,000 new jobs, making Texas the center of U.S.
    semiconductor manufacturing.
        Texas has a storied history in the invention and production
    of semiconductors, and we are proud to help lead America's
    semiconductor renaissance. And I would encourage the Commerce
    Department to look to the model in Texas and see how to make
    this broader effort more successful.
        Finally, it is worth noting that the other half of the
    CHIPS and Science's Act, Director Panchanathan, the NSF, does
    substantial work advancing basic science that helps expand our
    scientific knowledge, and that is important work, but I am
    deeply concerned over what appears to be the increasing
    politicization of NSF-funded science, and the feedback loop,
    and the scientific stagnation this is creating.
        I am especially disturbed by recent reports that NSF has,
    to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, been funding
    projects on how to counter, ``populist narratives'' and so-
    called ``mis- and disinformation'', which seems like little
    more than funding the pseudoscience of censorship.
        So I look forward to hearing from both our witnesses today
    on how they are implementing this very important law. The
    taxpayers have put a lot of skin in this game, and we all owe
    it to them to get it right.
        The Chair. Thank you. We will start now with Secretary
    Raimondo. Welcome. I can't imagine what a busy time it is for
    you and the organization that is implementing this Act. We
    appreciate your time being here today.

            STATEMENT OF HON. GINA M. RAIMONDO, SECRETARY,
                      U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

        Secretary Raimondo. It is my pleasure to be here today.
    Thank you, Chairwoman, and thank you, Ranking Member Cruz, and
    Members of the Committee; thank you for the opportunity to come
    talk to you about how we are implementing this historic
    legislation. And of course, I am so pleased to be here with
    ``Panch'', a fantastic NSF Director.
        I do want to begin by taking just a second to share my
    condolences with Senator Feinstein's family. She was a pioneer
    and a role model for so many women like me. So I wanted to just
    take a second to say that.
        Because of your hard work, in large part due to you,
    Chairwoman Cantwell, and bipartisan support of the Committee,
    the Commerce Department now has the honor, responsibility to
    invest $50 billion in our domestic semiconductor manufacturing
    and research and development. And I concur; this is an enormous
    responsibility and a massive amount of taxpayer dollars.
        We opened the application process in February, just a few
    months after you passed the bill. We have since received more
    than 500 statements of interest from 42 states, from
    manufacturers large and small. They outline proposals to
    manufacture chips and the relevant equipment and materials here
    in the United States. Very importantly, of the 500 statements
    of interest, we have received over 100 applications, or pre-
    applications.
        In the last two weeks, we finalized and put out the
    guardrails to protect U.S. Government investments and bolster
    our national security. We are also developing our CHIPS R&D
    Program to meet the unique challenges of building a sustained
    R&D to manufacturing pipeline. The centerpiece of these efforts
    is the National Semiconductor Technology Center, or the NSTC,
    which we expect to launch this fall. So a great deal of
    activity since about a year ago when the bill was passed. And
    of course, all of that research and development work we are
    doing in collaboration with the NSF.
        The CHIPS and Science Act also authorized two new programs,
    the Tech Hub Initiative and Recompete, which we are
    administering through the EDA. We have received 400
    applications for the Tech Hub grants. It is unbelievable; I
    have never seen anything more oversubscribed. Later this fall,
    EDA will launch--will make the announcements of the Tech Hub
    designations, and then also invite an opportunity for
    additional funding for implementation.
        Similarly, we are investing $200 million in the Recompete
    Pilot Program to spur economic activity in geographically
    diverse and economically distressed communities across the
    country.
        Thanks to your work in the CHIPS and Science Act, we are
    making historically bold and strategic investments that will
    strengthen our national and economic security. If we are
    successful, when we are successful, the United States will
    become the premier destination in the world where new chip
    architectures can be invented in our research labs, designed
    for applications, manufactured at scale by well-trained, well-
    paid American workers, and packaged in the United States. So it
    is a tremendous piece of work that we have, great progress on
    since the bill was passed; of course, we will answer any
    questions related to that.
        Before I close, just to mention how stressed we were about
    the possibility of a Government shutdown, and how troubling it
    was to come within hours of that shutdown. So thank you for
    working hard to make sure that did not happen. It goes without
    saying, China, Russia, Iran aren't shutting down. The work we
    are doing in the CHIPS Act is essential to our national
    security, and any shutdown would be massively disruptive to our
    ability to stay on the pace that we are on in implementing this
    very important work.
        So with that, I will be open for questions, or turn it over
    to Panch.
        [The prepared statement of Secretary Raimondo follows:]

            Prepared Statement of Hon. Gina M. Raimondo, Secretary,
                          U.S. Department of Commerce
        Chair Cantwell, Ranking Member Cruz, and members of the Committee,
    thank you for this opportunity to update you on the Commerce
    Department's (Commerce, or the Department) efforts to unleash the next
    generation of American innovation, protect our national security, and
    preserve our global economic competitiveness through implementation of
    the ``CHIPS and Science Act'', which Congress passed and President
    Biden signed into law over one year ago.
        Thanks to the bipartisan support for the CHIPS and Science Act from
    members of this Committee and across the Congress, the Department is
    making substantial progress on some of our Nation's most pressing
    economic and national security priorities, including those related to
    our supply chains, manufacturing, innovation, and workforce.
        The research, innovation, and manufacturing sparked by this law can
    solidify America's position as the world's technological superpower,
    securing our economic and national security future for the coming
    decades. As global competition becomes increasingly about technology
    and semiconductors (chips), rather than just tanks and missiles, the
    countries that invest in research, innovation, and their workforces
    will lead in the 21st century. The CHIPS and Science Act will help
    enable us to seize that leadership with its strong support for the
    National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and its important
    mission focused on developing the measurement science and standards
    critical to U.S. leadership in emerging technologies like
    biotechnology, quantum science, cybersecurity, and artificial
    intelligence. Over the past year, NIST has made significant advances in
    each of the areas highlighted by the Act, including the release of the
    NIST Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework, the update of
    NIST's Cybersecurity Framework, funding for additional regional
    cybersecurity workforce partnerships, and enhanced leadership in
    international standards development through the launch and
    implementation of the United States Government National Standards
    Strategy for Critical and Emerging Technologies. Furthermore, I
    appreciate this Committee's support for strengthening and updating the
    research infrastructure at NIST and it continues to be a priority of
    the Department.
    CHIPS Incentives and Research and Development (R&D) Implementation
        Within the CHIPS and Science Act, the CHIPS program's success will
    be judged on at least two key criteria: one, whether this program
    enabled us to build a reliable and resilient semiconductor industry
    including a robust workforce and strong innovation ecosystem that
    protects America's technological leadership for the coming decades; and
    two, whether the Department was a good steward of taxpayer dollars. The
    United States government is making a public investment in private
    industry without recent precedent, and taxpayers deserve transparency
    and accountability.
        Today, I would like to provide the Committee with an update on the
    Commerce Department's efforts toward implementing this historic
    legislation. The National Institute of Standards and Technology at the
    Department of Commerce is overseeing $50 billion to revitalize the U.S.
    semiconductor industry, including $39 billion in semiconductor
    incentives and $11 billion in research and development. Since August
    2022, when the CHIPS and Science Act became law, the Department has
    created and staffed two new offices, the CHIPS Program Office (CPO) and
    the CHIPS R&D office, hiring over 150 employees to develop, implement,
    and oversee the programs. Both offices have attracted top-notch talent
    across sectors, including from private industry, national security,
    finance, and the Federal government.
        In February, the Department launched the first funding opportunity,
    seeking applications for projects to construct, expand, or modernize
    commercial facilities for the production of leading-edge, current-
    generation, and mature-node semiconductors. This includes both front-
    end wafer fabrication and back-end packaging. In June, the Department
    opened this funding opportunity to semiconductor materials and
    manufacturing equipment facilities for which the capital investment
    equals or exceeds $300 million. Last week, the Department released a
    second funding opportunity which seeks applications for smaller-scale
    projects involving the construction, expansion, or modernization of
    semiconductor materials and manufacturing equipment facilities for
    which the capital investment falls below $300 million. In the coming
    months, the Department intends to announce an additional funding
    opportunity for R&D facilities.
        Across all of the funding opportunities, applicants will be
    evaluated based primarily on the extent to which the application
    addresses the program's economic and national security objectives, but
    they will be based on commercial viability, financial strength, project
    technical feasibility and readiness, workforce development, and broader
    impacts, like the ability of the new facilities to support the R&D
    programs like the National Semiconductor Technology Center (NSTC).
        To guide its investments, the Department has released two ``Vision
    for Success'' papers outlining its strategic objectives. The first
    vision statement focused on the Department's investments in commercial
    fabrication facilities. If those investments are successful, then by
    the end of the decade the United States will have at least two new
    large-scale clusters of leading-edge logic fabs; be home to multiple
    high-volume advanced packaging facilities; produce high-volume leading-
    edge dynamic random-access memory (DRAM) chips on economically
    competitive terms; and have increased production capacity for the
    current-generation and mature-node chips most vital to U.S. economic
    and national security.
        The Department has also released a vision statement for its
    investments in facilities for semiconductor materials and manufacturing
    equipment. In investing in the upstream supply chain, the Department
    aims to strengthen supply chain resilience, including by addressing
    chokepoint risks flowing from geographic concentration; advancing U.S.
    technology leadership; and supporting vibrant U.S. fab clusters.
        Since the launch of the first funding opportunity, the response has
    been overwhelmingly positive--the Department has received more than 500
    statements of interest (SOIs) from companies in 42 states. These SOIs
    represent potential applicants seeking CHIPS incentives for commercial
    fabrication facilities, packaging facilities, material suppliers and
    equipment manufacturers, and R&D facilities. Additionally, the
    Department has received over 100 pre-applications and full
    applications, demonstrating that as applicants become eligible to file
    a pre-application or full application, they are moving through the
    process and directly engaging with the CHIPS Incentives Program. It is
    clear that the private sector is eager to continue investing in America
    and is ambitious about scaling up semiconductor production across the
    country.
        In addition, recognizing the national security imperative of
    investments in the domestic semiconductor industry, the Departments of
    Commerce and Defense in July announced a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
    to expand collaboration to strengthen the U.S. semiconductor defense
    industrial base. The agreement will increase information-sharing
    between the Departments to facilitate close coordination on the CHIPS
    for America's incentives programs, including collaboration on potential
    investment applications to ensure that our departments are making
    complementary decisions that maximize Federal investments under the
    CHIPS Incentive Program and the Department of Defense's (DoD) Defense
    Production Act and Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment funds. This
    alignment of priorities and decision-making will help ensure that our
    respective investments position the U.S. to produce semiconductor chips
    essential to national security and defense programs.
        The Department's commitment to national security in the CHIPS
    program is also reflected in our effort to implement strict guardrails
    to ensure that the investments made in research and innovation are not
    used to benefit foreign countries of concern, which includes China.
    Last month, the Department issued a final rule that meets the national
    security goals of the CHIPS and Science Act. The rule, ``Preventing the
    Improper Use of CHIPS Act Funding,'' seeks to impose two main
    categories of guardrails: 1) limiting the expansion of semiconductor
    manufacturing in foreign countries of concern, and 2) limiting joint
    research or technology licensing efforts with foreign entities of
    concern that relate to technology or products that raise national
    security concerns. The rule will help ensure CHIPS investments enhance
    global supply chain resilience and promote U.S. leadership in designing
    and building important semiconductor technologies.
        Our CHIPS projects cannot succeed without investing in the workers
    who will build, operate, and maintain fabs. Last February, I called for
    America to double the semiconductor workforce overall including by
    tripling the number of graduates in semiconductor related fields and
    training 100,000 new technicians. Since then, the Department has worked
    closely with the semiconductor industry, labor unions, education
    providers, and other community partners to develop a strong vision for
    workforce development. This includes carefully assessing the workforce
    development plans in applications, working with recipients and
    education and training partners once awards are made, and supporting
    investments that expand the workforce pipeline including women and
    people of color.
        Finally, the CHIPS and Science Act also created a 25 percent
    investment tax credit for companies making qualified investments in
    facilities with a primary purpose of producing semiconductors or
    semiconductor manufacturing equipment. We welcome the Department of the
    Treasury's work to implement this tax credit, including the release of
    a proposed rule in March 2023. This tax credit will be an important
    complement to Commerce's incentive funds.
        Our success will be short-lived if we focus only on manufacturing.
    The $39 billion in incentives will bring semiconductor manufacturing
    back to the United States, but a robust R&D ecosystem will keep it
    here. That is why, with the support of Congress, the Department is
    investing $11 billion to build a strong semiconductor R&D ecosystem to
    generate the ideas and the talent necessary to support these efforts.
        The heart of these investments is the National Semiconductor
    Technology Center, which is an ambitious public-private partnership
    where government, industry, customers, suppliers, educational
    institutions, entrepreneurs, and investors converge to innovate,
    connect, and solve problems. The Department envisions a network of
    several centers around the country, solving the most impactful,
    relevant, and universal R&D challenges in the industry. Their work--
    fueled by industry support--will generate new devices, processes,
    tools, and materials for our manufacturing ecosystem. Most importantly,
    the NSTC will ensure that the United States leads the way in the next
    generation of semiconductor technologies--everything from quantum
    computing, materials science, and Artificial Intelligence (AI) to
    future applications not even contemplated yet.
        Recently, the Department announced leaders to serve on a selection
    committee that, acting independently of the Department, will select the
    board of trustees that will form a non-profit, which the Department
    anticipates will serve as the operator for the NSTC. I am pleased to
    inform the Committee that, together with our partners at DoD, the
    Department of Energy, and the National Science Foundation, the
    Department of Commerce is in the process of establishing the NSTC
    consortium. The Department anticipates that the NSTC consortium will be
    operated by the new, purpose-built, non-profit entity.
        In addition to the NSTC, the Department received funding for three
    programs that are also focused on research and development--the
    National Advanced Packaging Manufacturing Program, the CHIPS R&D
    Metrology Program, and the Manufacturing USA institute(s). We
    anticipate that the four R&D programs will share infrastructure,
    participants, and projects and operate in coordination with each other.
    The CHIPS R&D programs will be informed by the needs of the entire
    American semiconductor ecosystem including the recipients of CHIPS
    manufacturing incentives. In turn, the technological and workforce
    advancements made by CHIPS R&D programs will benefit the U.S.
    semiconductor sector and supply chain--and help incentivize recipients
    and others to overcome manufacturing hurdles, compete in global
    markets, and meet the goals of the CHIPS and Science Act. We will
    continue to work with partners across the interagency including the
    National Science Foundation, which oversees $200 million for CHIPS
    workforce, the DoD, Department of Energy, and others to achieve these
    goals.
        Instead of aiming for self-sufficiency or looking to close the
    United States off from global markets or competition, the Department is
    working to strengthen our position as a global leader in a fiercely
    competitive and global industry. As CHIPS for America invests across
    the supply chain, the Department is prioritizing robust international
    engagement. Through bilateral and multilateral dialogues, and business-
    to-business and government-to-business forums, the Department is
    working with like-minded partners to strengthen and diversify the
    global semiconductor supply chain. The Department's CHIPS-related
    international engagement to date has included engagements with the
    Republic of Korea, Japan, India, and the United Kingdom, and through
    the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), the U.S.-European Union
    Trade and Technology Council (TTC), and North American Leaders' Summit
    (NALS). The Department will continue coordinating closely with U.S.
    partners and allies to advance these shared goals, advance our
    collective security, and strengthen global supply chains.
        We also welcome the work of the Department of State in implementing
    the International Technology Security and Innovation Fund (``ITSI
    Fund''), which was created under the CHIPS and Science Act and provides
    the Department of State with $500 million overall--to deepen U.S.
    cooperation with like-minded countries, on both semiconductor and
    secure Information and Communications Technology lines of effort, to
    ensure that the technologies of the future will reinforce our shared
    economic and national security. The Department applauds the State
    Department's announcement in June that it is directing funds from the
    ITSI Fund to support projects this year and next year at the
    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to create
    an information exchange network of officials involved in semiconductor
    industry policymaking, a government-to-government repository of
    information on active and planned semiconductor production facilities,
    and other efforts to work collaboratively to develop strategies that
    increase the resilience of global semiconductor supply chains.
    Regional Technology and Innovation Hubs (Tech Hubs) Implementation
        In addition to revitalizing America's domestic semiconductor
    manufacturing sector and research and development ecosystem, the CHIPS
    and Science Act enabled the development of centers of innovation and
    job creation through the Regional Technology and Innovation Hub Program
    (Tech Hubs), administered by the Economic Development Administration
    (EDA). The Tech Hubs program aims to strengthen economic and national
    security by enabling the industries of the future to start, grow, and
    remain in regions throughout the United States. In these Hubs,
    institutions of higher education, state and local governments, economic
    development organizations, labor and workforce partners, and others in
    the region will come together to supercharge ecosystems of innovation
    for technologies that are essential to our economic and national
    security.
        In May, the Department launched the first Notice of Funding
    Opportunity (NOFO) to open applications for strategy development
    funding and Tech Hubs Designations. Later this year, the Department
    will launch a second NOFO for applicants designated as a Tech Hub to
    apply for implementation funding. Through these two phases, EDA will
    award $500 million appropriated through the Consolidated Appropriations
    Act, 2023. Successful proposals will demonstrate a region's commitment
    to its primary technological strength and the potential for Tech Hubs
    investments to enable the region's primary innovative industry to
    become a global leader in that critical technology area within a
    decade. EDA received 378 applications in response to the first NOFO by
    the August 15 deadline. Each applicant selected their region's core
    technology industry that fits among 10 Key Focus Areas (e.g., AI, high-
    performance computing, quantum information science and technology,
    robotics, etc.) identified in the CHIPS and Science Act.
        Through the Tech Hubs program, the Department is committed to
    strengthening economic and national security by advancing the
    capacities of regions to manufacture, commercialize, and deploy these
    technologies, guided by the following priorities: 1) making more U.S.
    regions strong competitors in the global innovation economy; 2)
    building strong communities that share in the prosperity technological
    innovations bring; 3) spurring the creation of new good jobs and other
    opportunities for workers at all skill levels; and 4) strengthening and
    making more resilient the supply chains that our innovative technology-
    centric industries rely on to stay secure and competitive.
    Distressed Area Recompete Pilot Program (Recompete) Implementation
        As part of the Department's commitment to creating good-paying jobs
    and ensuring that no community is left behind, another key element of
    the CHIPS and Science Act is the Distressed Area Recompete Pilot
    Program (Recompete). In June of this year, Commerce announced that
    Recompete will invest $200 million in projects that spur economic
    activity in geographically diverse and persistently distressed
    communities across the country. Specifically, this program targets
    areas where prime-age (25-54 years) employment significantly trails the
    national average. The program aims to close this gap through EDA's
    place-based approach and delivering large, highly flexible grants based
    on community-driven strategies to address unique workforce and economic
    development needs of individual communities or regions.
        The Department is running Recompete through two phases. As part of
    our June announcement, the Department launched the first phase, a
    Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), which invites applicants to apply
    for (1) Strategy Development Grants, (2) approval of a Recompete Plan,
    or (3) both. In Phase 2, regions with approved Recompete Plans will be
    invited to apply for implementation funding. EDA anticipates making 4-8
    implementation awards between $20 million and $50 million, each.
    Eligible applicants include local and state governments, Tribal
    governments, political subdivisions of a State or other entity, non-
    profits, Economic Development Districts, and coalitions of any of these
    entities that serve or are contained within an eligible geographic
    area. To support applicants in determining if they are in an Eligible
    Area, EDA, in partnership with Argonne National Laboratory, has
    released the Recompete Eligibility Mapping Tool. Announcement of Phase
    1 winners and the release of the Phase 2 NOFO is expected later this
    year, and applicants with approved Recompete Plans will be invited to
    submit a Phase 2 application. Working with our state and local
    partners, Recompete will target areas of our country most in need of
    economic resources, assets, and options to ensure that they get the
    investments they deserve.
    NIST for the Future Implementation
        The Department appreciates the reauthorization of NIST through the
    inclusion of Title II of Division B, commonly known as the ``NIST for
    the Future Act'', in the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022. NIST is
    essential in the development, manufacture, and adoption of technologies
    critical today and those yet to be imagined, enabling both economic and
    national security for the Nation. NIST's mission focuses on driving
    U.S. innovation and supporting U.S. businesses and U.S. economic
    security in Critical and Emerging Technologies (CETs), including
    artificial intelligence, quantum information technologies,
    biotechnology, communication, and networking technologies. In addition
    to NIST's ongoing research role with CETs, NIST is leading the
    execution of the U.S. Government's National Standards Strategy for
    Critical and Emerging Technology and the development of Federal
    standards policy to ensure continued U.S. global economic
    competitiveness and technology leadership. I would also like to
    highlight that NIST's laboratory and extramural programs, such as the
    Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) and Manufacturing USA, help
    U.S. industry develop and implement new technologies, develop robust
    supply chains, refine their systems for efficiency and effectiveness,
    and increase engagement of underserved communities in workforce
    development programs.
        The CHIPS and Science Act authorized a pilot program of awards that
    will allow MEP centers to provide services focused on resiliency of
    domestic supply chains, workforce development, and adoption of advanced
    technology upgrades at small and medium-sized manufacturers. In June,
    we awarded roughly $400,000 to MEP Centers in every state and Puerto
    Rico. The more than $20 million in funding is being used to develop
    programs to make domestic supply chains more resilient and efficient.
    The new awards will focus on providing supplier scouting services,
    establishing new service offerings to improve existing supply chain
    networks, filling gaps in the supply chain by connecting original
    equipment manufacturers with small and medium-sized manufacturers, and
    creating a complete map of U.S. supplier capability and capacity.
        Manufacturing USA will announce a funding opportunity in the fall
    for a new Commerce-sponsored Manufacturing USA institute. Manufacturing
    USA was appropriated $14 million in one-time supplemental funds in
    support of CHIPS and Science Act responsibilities. The Workforce,
    Education and Vibrant Ecosystems (WEAVE) funding opportunity was
    announced in August and will be open to existing Manufacturing USA
    institutes. These will be public service awards to engage with HBCUs
    and minority-serving Institutions and to assist in transitioning
    Institute-developed technologies into the public, such as through
    testbeds and other types of technologies that can address scale up.
    NOAA Ocean Acidification Activities
        The CHIPS and Science Act strengthens the National Oceanic and
    Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) mission of science, service, and
    stewardship. NOAA is building a climate resilient nation by expanding
    NOAA's authoritative climate products and services in coordination with
    its Federal partners; fostering environmental stewardship and
    optimizing advances in science and technology to create value-added,
    data-driven economic development; and improving capabilities and
    knowledge sharing, expanding opportunities, and honing service
    delivery.
        Reauthorized and expanded by the CHIPS and Science Act, NOAA's
    Ocean Acidification Program coordinates research, monitoring, and
    activities to understand where and how fast the ocean's chemistry is
    changing, as well as the impacts these changes have on marine life,
    people, and economies. NOAA is working with other agencies and partners
    on these efforts, including in the stewardship of data necessary to
    make decisions to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of ocean
    acidification.
    Public Wireless Supply Chain Innovation Fund Implementation
        The CHIPS and Science Act also funded the Public Wireless Supply
    Chain Innovation Fund. The $1.5 billion Innovation Fund supports the
    development of open and interoperable wireless networks. This grant
    program will help drive wireless innovation, foster competition, and
    strengthen supply chain resilience. It will also help unlock
    opportunities for innovation and competition in a market historically
    dominated by a few suppliers, including high-risk suppliers that raise
    security concerns.
        In April, the Department announced its first funding opportunity
    under the Innovation Fund, making $140.5 million available to
    demonstrate the viability of new approaches to wireless, such as open
    radio access networks (Open RAN). The Department received more than 120
    applications for the first round of funding. And in early August, the
    Department announced nearly $5.5 million in awards from the first round
    of grants, which will support R&D and testing activities related to
    energy efficiency, the performance of interoperable equipment, and
    spectrum sharing testing. These are just the first steps the Department
    will take to promote the development and adoption of open,
    interoperable, and standards-based networks, and the Department will
    continue to make awards under the first funding opportunity through the
    fall.
    A Strong Position to Lead Globally
        The CHIPS and Science Act is central to the Biden Administration's
    efforts to revitalize American manufacturing and innovation and to lead
    globally. To effectively lead globally, the United States needs bold
    domestic investments and innovation ecosystems that bring manufacturing
    in critical technologies and industries back home. Moreover, without
    manufacturing strength in the United States and the innovation that
    flows from it, we risk again experiencing the devastating impact of
    supply chain shortages that we did during the height of the COVID-19
    pandemic.
        Over one year removed from the enactment of the CHIPS and Science
    Act, the Commerce Department's bold, strategic, and targeted
    investments are bolstering our economic and national security, making
    our semiconductor supply chain more resilient, promoting American
    manufacturing and innovation, and helping more workers and businesses
    compete and win in the 21st century global economy. The investments in
    critical technologies and regions unleashed by this law are essential
    to maintaining American technological leadership in the world in the
    21st century global economy.
        This testimony captures only some of the Department's activities to
    date under the CHIPS and Science Act. While the Department has made
    significant progress in implementation, more work remains to realize
    the promise of this historic law, and Congress is an important partner
    in these efforts. Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I
    welcome your questions.

        The Chair. Thank you.
        Director Panchanathan, thank you for being here.

     STATEMENT OF DR. SETHURAMAN PANCHANATHAN, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
                           SCIENCE FOUNDATION

        Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you so much. Thanks Chair Cantwell,
    Ranking Member Cruz, and Members of the Commerce Committee. It
    is great to be with all of you today, particularly with a
    colleague and a friend, Secretary Raimondo.
        Before I begin, I would like to extend my deepest
    condolences to all of you for the loss of your colleague,
    Senator Diane Feinstein. Not only was Senator Feinstein an
    incredible leader and trailblazer, she was also a champion for
    science, and NSF is grateful for her service to the Nation.
        Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the National
    Science Foundation's implementation of the CHIPS and Science
    Act, and how the agency is building upon decades of successful
    investments in science, engineering, and technology to ensure
    that the United States remains the global leader in innovation.
        For more than seven decades, NSF has been critical to
    powering our economy, transforming our quality of life, and
    securing our national defense, and yes, the Nobel Prizes
    yesterday, and today, and more to come. Many of the
    technological advances benefiting the Nation today, such as
    artificial intelligence, quantum information science, and
    biotechnology, are rooted in sustained NSF investments over
    many decades.
        However, we currently face intense global competition in
    the race to develop these technologies and to train the
    workforce of the future. NSF's ability to enable scientific
    breakthroughs and accelerate technological developments is
    central to our economic and national security and our continued
    global leadership.
        With the passage of the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022,
    Congress put in place a roadmap for meeting this challenge
    while spurring innovation in communities across our country.
    Over the past year and with the increased appropriations in
    Fiscal Year 2023, NSF has been able to make significant
    progress in implementing the CHIPS and Science Act. The agency
    has moved quickly to launch new opportunities for innovation,
    implement research security measures for safeguarding
    taxpayers' investments, and engage talent to inspire the STEM
    leaders of tomorrow.
        The NSF Regional Innovation Engines will catalyze new
    businesses and economic growth in diverse regions of America.
    When the NSF Engines' Program released its first funding
    opportunity last year, we received nearly 700 concept papers
    from every state and U.S. territory of our Nation.
        In May, NSF announced the first-ever NSF Engine Development
    Awards, consisting of 44 unique teams spanning 46 states and
    U.S. territories. Then, in August, NSF announced 16 finalists
    for the first full-scale NSF Engines. Through these two tracks,
    NSF plans to have invested nearly $200 million in regional
    innovation throughout our country by the end of this calendar
    year.
        I cannot understate how critical it is that we engage every
    part of our Nation in these efforts. NSF has been intentional
    in implementing new opportunities and expanding existing
    initiatives to engage everyone who wants to participate in
    STEM, in every state, across every geographic boundary, drawing
    the full diversity of our Nation. The CHIPS and Science Act
    included a requirement that NSF grow its investment in EPSCoR
    jurisdictions over time.
        I am very pleased to report that NSF has met and even
    exceeded the EPSCoR targets in the CHIPS and Science Act of
    Fiscal Year 2023.
        It is also critical that we safeguard these investments and
    take steps to address research security while also cultivating
    vibrant international partnerships. NSF plays a leading role in
    Federal efforts to address research security, and we are
    expanding the agency's capabilities and competencies to protect
    taxpayer investments.
        The CHIPS and Science Act includes valuable provisions that
    will help NSF build the capacity of the research community to
    make risk-informed decisions and strengthen the security of our
    national research enterprise.
        Equally important to the Nation's competitiveness, is NSF's
    commitment to funding exploratory-based research that creates
    new knowledge, and seeds the industries of tomorrow.
        For example, many of the AI advancements making news today,
    we celebrate them, both the innovative products and the talent
    that is developing them were catalyzed by NSF's continued
    investments over many decades, even through AI winters.
        Likewise, the technological advancements of tomorrow will
    be borne out of today's investments. In just the past 3 years,
    NSF has established 25 National AI Research Institutes in
    partnership with Federal agencies and industry. The half-a-
    billion-dollar investment reaches almost into every state,
    supporting cutting-edge research that is applying AI to key
    economic sectors like agriculture, weather, and public health.
        NSF's ability to generate more breakthroughs and foster
    more innovations, and to do so faster than ever before, is
    critical to keeping our country as a global leader in STEM.
    With the support of this Committee, and Congress, and through
    continued successful implementation of the CHIPS and Science
    Act, NSF is strengthening our national and economic security
    and enabling, to quote again Chair Cantwell, ``Innovation
    anywhere and opportunities everywhere across our nation''.
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today.
        [The prepared statement of Dr. Panchanathan follows:]

         Prepared Statement of Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan, Director,
                          National Science Foundation
    Introduction
        Chair Cantwell, Ranking Member Cruz, and Members of the Committee,
    it is a privilege to appear before you today to discuss the National
    Science Foundation's implementation of the CHIPS and Science Act of
    2022, and how the agency is building upon decades of successful
    investments in science, engineering, and technology to ensure that the
    United States remains the global leader in innovation into the future.
        Established by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (P.L.
    81-507), the National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent
    Federal agency charged with the mission ``to promote the progress of
    science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to
    secure the national defense; and for other purposes.'' NSF is unique in
    carrying out its mission by supporting research across all fields of
    science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), and at all
    levels and settings of STEM education. NSF investments contribute
    significantly to the economic and national security interests of the
    Nation, and the development of a future-focused science and engineering
    workforce that draws on the talents of all Americans.
        For more than seven decades, NSF has been a critical component in
    powering the United States economy, transforming American lives, and
    securing the national defense. Many of the technological advances from
    which the Nation is benefiting from today, such as Artificial
    Intelligence (AI), Quantum Information Science, and Biotechnology, are
    rooted in sustained NSF investments. However, we currently face intense
    global competition in the race to develop the next breakthroughs in
    these key technology areas and to grow the workforce needed to unlock
    these innovations. Our success in enabling scientific breakthroughs and
    accelerating these and other technological developments is central to
    our economic and national security and our continued global leadership.
        With the passage of the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, Congress put
    in place a roadmap for meeting this challenge while also spurring
    innovation in all communities throughout the country. The law codifies
    NSF's new Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships
    (TIP), and positions the agency to capitalize on the uniquely American
    research and innovation ecosystem that includes academia, private
    industry, the government, civil society, and other partners to shape
    future research directions and quickly translate research outputs into
    impacts that benefit the Nation. The law also reaffirms our commitment
    to exploratory-based, discovery-driven research that is foundational to
    advancing progress. NSF is unique in how the agency invests in research
    across every STEM discipline, and the CHIPS and Science Act challenges
    us to invest even more intentionally across all geographic boundaries
    and socioeconomic groups. Through such investments, NSF plays a major
    role in inspiring and training the next-generation STEM workforce--
    through K-12 informal STEM education, technical training, support for
    master's and Ph.D. students, and adult and continuing education,
    including experiential learning, enabling reskilling and upskilling of
    the current workforce. NSF's role in workforce training has become
    increasingly important with the significant investments in
    semiconductor manufacturing, which will require strong partnerships
    between the Federal government, academia, and private industry to train
    the needed workforce. The CHIPS and Science Act provided $200 million
    for the CHIPS for America Workforce and Education Fund, and NSF is
    using the $50 million provided over Fiscal Years 2023 and 2024 to
    leverage additional resources, including more than $145 million in
    partnerships with the private sector, to address the needs of the
    semiconductor industry.
        Over the past year, with the increased funding the agency received
    in the FY 2023 Omnibus Appropriations Act, NSF has been able to make
    significant progress in implementing the CHIPS and Science Act. The
    agency has moved quickly to expand the TIP Directorate by launching new
    opportunities for innovation while engaging industry, academia,
    philanthropies, and others to ensure the broadest possible impact of
    these critical investments. The agency has also moved swiftly to
    implement research security measures to safeguard taxpayer investments
    and has conducted outreach, education, and training throughout the
    research enterprise while strengthening agency oversight measures. In
    addition, NSF continues to prioritize engaging talent and inspiring the
    STEM leaders of the future throughout the Nation--from all geographic
    and demographic backgrounds--to ensure we are training the domestic
    workforce needed for our future competitiveness.
    Ensuring U.S. Leadership in Innovation
        With the support of the Administration and Congress, NSF launched
    its first new directorate in more than thirty years. The new
    Directorate for Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships (TIP), which
    was codified in the CHIPS and Science Act, sits at the crossroads of
    exploratory, curiosity-driven research, use-inspired, solutions-
    oriented research, and translational research across all disciplines of
    science and engineering. The TIP Directorate, in close collaboration
    with all of NSF's directorates and offices, is focused on advancing the
    key technology areas and addressing the national, societal, and
    geostrategic challenges identified in Section 10387 of the CHIPS and
    Science Act. TIP is fostering new innovation ecosystems throughout the
    Nation, transforming regions into national and global anchors in key
    technologies; accelerating the translation of research results from the
    lab to the market and society; and cultivating new education pathways
    for a diverse and skilled future technical workforce comprising
    researchers, practitioners, technicians, entrepreneurs, and educators.
    Further, TIP opens new possibilities for research, innovation, and
    education by catalyzing strategic partnerships linking academia;
    industry, startups and small businesses; federal, state, local, and
    tribal governments; nonprofits and philanthropic organizations; civil
    society; and communities of practice to cultivate 21st-century
    innovation ecosystems that give rise to future, high-wage, good-quality
    jobs and enhance the Nation's long-term competitiveness. Over the past
    year we have seen immense interest from a wide range of institutions,
    industries, and state and local governments in the new opportunities
    NSF has unveiled through TIP. For example, nearly 700 teams from every
    state and U.S. territory responded to the NSF Regional Innovation
    Engines call for concept papers.
        Since the enactment of the CHIPS and Science Act just over a year
    ago, NSF has moved expeditiously to realize the law's vision for TIP.
    In that time, NSF has made more than 760 new awards and partnered with
    10 different Federal agencies and more than 10 industry groups or
    nonprofits through the TIP Directorate. These efforts span a wide range
    of activities, ranging from regional innovation to supporting the next
    generation of entrepreneurs.
        As authorized by the CHIPS and Science Act, the NSF Regional
    Innovation Engines (NSF Engines) program is a major new undertaking
    that will catalyze new businesses and economic growth in diverse
    regions of America that have not fully participated in the technology
    boom of the past several decades. Understanding that not all
    communities and proposed collaborations will be immediately ready to
    launch full-scale NSF Engines, the program comprises two tracks: Type-1
    NSF Engines Developmental Awards and Type-2 NSF Engines. The Type-1
    awards invest up to $1 million to help organizations create connections
    and develop their local innovation ecosystems over a two-year period to
    prepare strong proposals for becoming future NSF Engines. The Type-2
    NSF Engines could receive up to $160 million over 10 years. When
    successful, an NSF Engine will lead to its region becoming a nationally
    and potentially globally renowned, self-sustaining, technology and
    innovation-driven hub of economic activity for the topic in which it
    specializes. Each NSF Engine's status and overall progress will be
    assessed annually, with metrics and milestones that will determine
    whether NSF will continue to support the NSF Engine year over year.
    Through these two tracks, NSF is seeding the future for communities to
    grow their regional economies by fostering partnerships that will
    unleash ideas, talent, pathways, and resources to create vibrant
    innovation ecosystems across the United States.
        When the NSF Engines program released its first funding
    opportunity, NSF received nearly 700 concept papers from every state
    and U.S. territory. In May of this year, NSF announced the first-ever
    Type-1 NSF Engines Developmental Awards consisting of 44 unique teams
    spanning 46 states and U.S. territories. Then, in August, NSF announced
    16 finalists for the first full-scale Type-2 NSF Engines. NSF
    anticipates announcing the NSF Engines awards this winter, with each
    awardee initially receiving approximately $15 million for the first two
    years. Through these two tracks, NSF will have invested nearly $200
    million in regional innovation throughout the country by the end of
    this calendar year.
        While NSF is excited by the broad geographic distribution and
    extensive engagement across academia, industry, and other sectors, we
    also know that more must be done to fully engage the talent that exists
    throughout the Nation. That is why NSF launched the Enabling
    Partnerships to Increase Innovation Capacity (EPIIC) program. EPIIC
    will build capacity among minority-serving institutions, two-year
    institutions, undergraduate institutions, and other emerging research
    institutions in regional innovation ecosystems, with the hope that they
    will go on to participate in an NSF Engine or similar regional
    innovation activity. NSF recently announced its first-ever EPIIC
    investment of $19.6 million to 49 institutions (via 47 awards) at U.S.
    institutions of higher education (IHEs), including teams from
    historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs), Tribal colleges
    and universities (TCUs), and minority-serving institutions, including
    Hispanic-serving institutions (HSIs), and community colleges.
    Importantly, in this inaugural cohort of NSF Engine Development Awards,
    NSF Engines finalists, and EPIIC awards, NSF is touching 48 states plus
    multiple U.S. territories.
        NSF and the Department of Commerce are collaborating closely
    together on regional innovation efforts. NSF and the Economic
    Development Administration (EDA) share a mutual commitment to regional
    innovation and economic development in communities across the Nation.
    The CHIPS and Science Act authorizes both agencies to implement
    programs to enable regional technology development and economic and job
    growth through the NSF Engines and the EDA Regional Technology and
    Innovation Hubs programs. In July, NSF and EDA signed a memorandum of
    understanding to officially enable cross-agency coordination on these
    critical programs to ensure they contribute to regional economic growth
    and U.S. competitiveness in key technology areas.
        In addition to incubating regional innovation, NSF has also
    prioritized investing in the workforce the Nation needs to be
    successful today and into the future. NSF invests in the entire
    spectrum of STEM education and training, from K-12 students and
    teachers; to technical and vocational training; to undergraduate,
    graduate, and postgraduate researchers across all fields of science,
    engineering, and technology. For example, NSF's Experiential Learning
    in Emerging and Novel Technologies (ExLENT) program will support
    inclusive experiential learning opportunities designed to provide
    cohorts of diverse learners with the crucial skills and support
    services needed to succeed in the key technology focus areas and
    prepare them to enter the workforce ready to solve the Nation's most
    pressing societal,, national, and geostrategic challenges. NSF just
    recently announced the first-ever ExLENT awards to 27 teams at U.S.
    institutions of higher education and nonprofits, including teams led by
    historically Black colleges and universities and minority-serving
    institutions, representing a total investment of $18.8 million.
        Equally important to the Nation's competitiveness is NSF's
    commitment to funding exploratory-based research that creates new
    knowledge and seeds the industries of tomorrow. For example, many of
    the AI advancements making news today--both the innovative products and
    the talent that is developing them--are made possible by NSF's long
    history of investments dating back decades. From reinforcement
    learning, which supports more effective chatbots, inventory managers,
    and self-adjusting thermostats, to the deep learning techniques that
    have led to generative AI, NSF's investments built the foundation for
    the AI tools and applications of today. This technical foundation has
    also been critical for our defense and intelligence communities,
    translating into capabilities that underpin national security. Over the
    past three years, NSF has established 25 National AI Research
    Institutes, or AI Institutes, in partnership with other federal
    agencies and industry. This $500 million investment touches almost
    every state, supporting cutting-edge research that is applying AI to
    key economic sectors like agriculture, weather, and public health.
        Another example of NSF's commitment to investing in foundational
    breakthroughs is the recent announcement of a $162 million investment
    in nine new Materials Research Science and Engineering Centers (MRSECs)
    that will each receive $18 million over six years. The centers aim to
    transform fundamental scientific breakthroughs into tangible benefits
    for multiple sectors of the U.S. economy and innovations that can be
    produced on tomorrow's factory floors--from being tough enough to
    withstand the heat of a fusion reactor to processing information at the
    quantum level. Since the 1970s, NSF's MRSECs have yielded countless
    breakthroughs, from shape-morphing materials to plastics that conduct
    electricity. NSF now supports 20 MRSECs and these most recent
    investments expand the centers' portfolios to pursue a broad range of
    research projects to unlock new capabilities in several areas:
    semiconductors, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, sustainable
    energy sources and storage, advanced manufacturing, quantum computing
    and sensing, and other areas critical for U.S. leadership in materials
    research.
        Early last month, NSF announced four new Science and Technology
    Centers (STCs) that will enable advances in fields ranging from cell
    biology and complex materials to new applications of sound waves and
    environmental change. Since it was established in 1987, the STC program
    has supported exceptionally innovative, complex research and education
    projects that have opened new areas of science and engineering and
    developed breakthrough technologies. STCs conduct world-class research
    through partnerships among institutions of higher education, national
    laboratories, industrial organizations and other public or private
    entities, and via international collaborations. They provide a means to
    undertake groundbreaking investigations across disciplines and highly
    innovative approaches within disciplines. They also play a fundamental
    role in engaging, recruiting, retaining, and mentoring the next
    generation of scientists and engineers from groups underrepresented in
    STEM.
        The CHIPS and Science Act reiterated the importance of NSF's
    mission to invest in exploratory, curiosity-driven research. NSF will
    continue to make significant investments in center-scale research such
    as the MRSECs and STCs, as well as in the individuals all across the
    Nation to ensure we are exploring the frontiers of science and
    engineering and leading the world in innovation.
    Safeguarding Taxpayer Investments
        The future of U.S. competitiveness requires that we safeguard these
    critical investments and take steps to address research security while
    also cultivating vibrant international partnerships that are critical
    to success. NSF plays a leading role in Federal efforts to address
    research security and is expanding capabilities and competencies to
    protect the U.S. science and engineering enterprise. In January 2022,
    the National Science and Technology Council's Research Security
    Subcommittee, which is co-chaired by NSF, issued implementation
    guidance for National Security Presidential Memorandum 33 (NSPM-33) on
    National Security Strategy for United States Government-Supported
    Research and Development. In addition, the CHIPS and Science Act
    contains several research security provisions that NSF is in the
    process of implementing. NSF has engaged in robust discussions with the
    U.S. research community and with like-minded international colleagues
    through groups like the G7 and bilaterally to develop common frameworks
    for understanding and addressing research security.
        NSF has prohibited our staff from participating in any foreign
    talent recruitment programs and updated and clarified our guidelines
    and requirements for institutions and individuals requesting funding
    from NSF so that senior/key persons identified on proposals cannot
    participate in malign foreign talent recruitment programs. NSF has also
    established new analytic capabilities to proactively identify conflicts
    of commitment, vulnerabilities of pre-publication research, and risks
    to the merit review system. NSF will scale up the use of these
    analytics to analyze all NSF awards and contribute to NSF's Small
    Business Innovation Research (SBIR) due diligence process in FY 2024.
        As required by the CHIPS and Science Act, NSF is in the process of
    establishing a Research Security and Integrity Information Sharing and
    Analysis Organization (RSI-ISAO), called SECURE, to provide needed
    information and tools to the research community. Full proposals for
    SECURE are due at the end of October. NSF is confident that we will be
    able to establish an innovative entity that will build the capacity of
    the research community to make risk-informed decisions and create a
    trusted partnership between research-awarding agencies and the research
    communities, which strengthens the security of our national research
    enterprise.
        NSF is also leading efforts through a partnership with the Federal
    government interagency community to develop research security training
    modules for the research community. These modules will be available in
    the coming months, and NSF plans to fund the delivery of these modules
    and their evaluation to help researchers understand and avoid research
    security risks. In addition, NSF has also put in place research
    security training for all of our staff, which is required to be
    completed on an annual basis.
        NSF is developing the system for reporting by institutions of
    higher education of foreign financial transactions with countries of
    concern above $50,000 as mandated in CHIPS and Science and will be
    coordinating closely with our Office of Inspector General on these
    reports. NSF will do appropriate due diligence to assess these reports.
        NSF takes very seriously the need to safeguard the investments the
    agency makes on behalf of the American taxpayer while also contributing
    to a vibrant global research community based on shared values with
    like-minded partners. We will continue to partner with other agencies,
    the intelligence and law enforcement communities, and the research
    community to take all necessary steps to do so.
    CHIPS for America Workforce and Education Fund
        The CHIPS and Science Act included $200 million for the CHIPS for
    America Workforce and Education Fund. NSF is investing those resources
    in an effort to train upwards of 100,000 new semiconductor researchers,
    practitioners, technicians, and educators over the next five years,
    fulfilling a key need of the semiconductor industry and further
    building a skilled U.S. semiconductor workforce. The CHIPS and Science
    Act provided $25 million in each of FY 2023 and 2024, and $50 million
    in each of FY 2025, 2026, and 2027.
        NSF has focused the FY 2023 funding to leverage existing
    investments to address the immediate needs of the semiconductor
    industry. For example, $10 million was provided to the TIP Directorate
    to fund scalable partnerships with the private sector, including Intel,
    Micron, Ericsson, IBM, and Samsung to enhance research traineeships and
    skilled semiconductor manufacturing workforce programs. This NSF
    investment will be matched by the companies. For example, in the case
    of Intel, the investment is part of an already-announced 10-year NSF-
    Intel partnership to invest $100 million to address semiconductor
    design and manufacturing research and workforce development throughout
    the country.
        NSF also invested more than $6 million of the FY 2023 funds in the
    new Future of Semiconductors (FuSe) program. The objective of this
    investment is to cultivate a broad coalition of researchers from across
    science and engineering communities to utilize a holistic, co-design
    approach to fundamental research and education and training, to enable
    rapid progress in new semiconductor technologies. Last month, NSF
    announced 24 research and education projects with a total investment of
    $45.6 million through a public-private partnership spanning NSF and
    four of the companies named above: Ericsson, IBM, Intel, and Samsung.
    These awards support novel, transdisciplinary research that will enable
    breakthroughs in semiconductors and microelectronics and address the
    national need for a reliable, secure supply of innovative semiconductor
    technologies, systems, and professionals.
        In FY 2024, NSF will focus on supporting a national-level
    clearinghouse that brings together academia, industry, and government
    to grow capacity and reduce barriers to grow a diverse workforce
    capable of ensuring U.S. competitiveness across all facets of
    microelectronics. Such a microelectronics workforce development
    clearinghouse will offer a proving ground for reliable, practicable,
    evidence-based, industry-aware curricula leading to new educational
    programs spanning secondary schools, two-year community and technical
    colleges, and minority-serving institutions across all 50 states, the
    District of Columbia, and U.S. territories. In doing so, NSF will
    enhance industry and career awareness among a diverse array of
    potential entrants to the industry, develop professional and technical
    skills, and provide work-based, experiential learning opportunities
    (e.g., internships, apprenticeships) that inspire prospective students
    to enroll in industry-related programs at community colleges and four-
    year universities. This approach has been recommended by coalitions of
    academia and industry as they have imagined how best to address the
    needs of the future semiconductor workforce.
        Put simply, this clearinghouse will foster high-quality and
    affordable training pathways aligned with the Administration's
    workforce approach, benefiting workers as much as they benefit
    employers, by setting workers on pathways to success in higher-quality
    careers in the long run.
        As the Federal Government's leader in STEM education, with a strong
    track record in fostering public and private partnerships, NSF is
    uniquely positioned to design, implement, scale, and sustain this
    clearinghouse. Moreover, success in the semiconductor and
    microelectronics sector will provide an evidence base for extending
    other key technology areas authorized in the CHIPS and Science Act. NSF
    is committed to investing the $200 million provided for the CHIPS for
    America Workforce and Education Fund and leveraging public-private
    partnerships to have the most impactful outcomes for the Nation.
    Innovation Anywhere, Opportunities Everywhere
        NSF is fully committed to the development of a future-focused
    science and engineering workforce that draws on the talents of all
    Americans, in every region of the country. The CHIPS and Science Act
    authorizes NSF to support broadening participation at the individual,
    institutional, and jurisdictional levels. At the individual level,
    CHIPS and Science authorizes programs that empower individuals through
    scholarships, fellows, traineeships, and project activities that enrich
    STEM education at all levels. At the institutional level, awards to
    minority-serving institutions, including community and technical
    colleges, will lead to greater opportunities for all students and
    faculty. Finally, at the jurisdictional level, NSF is working toward
    more geographical diversity across the entire NSF portfolio, especially
    to rural and urban institutions that serve diverse students.
        An important component of these efforts is NSF's Established
    Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR). EPSCoR enhances the
    research competitiveness of targeted jurisdictions by strengthening
    science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) capacity and
    capability through a diverse portfolio of investments from talent
    development to local infrastructure. The CHIPS and Science Act requires
    NSF to increase the percentage of the agency's investments in EPSCoR
    jurisdictions over a seven-year period, reaching 20 percent in FY 2029.
    For FY 2023, the EPSCoR target was 15.5 percent. We are pleased to
    report that NSF has met and slightly exceeded that target in FY 2023.
    In addition, as required by the CHIPS and Science Act, NSF is
    prioritizing activities that enable sustainable growth in the research
    competitiveness of EPSCoR jurisdictions. For example, in May, NSF
    released two new programs to further support EPSCoR jurisdictions in
    building sustainable research capacity. The EPSCoR Research Incubators
    for STEM Excellence (E-RISE) program supports incubation of research
    teams and products in scientific topical areas linked to a
    jurisdiction's scientific priorities. The EPSCoR Collaborations for
    Optimizing Research Ecosystems (E-CORE) program provides funding to
    support targeted research infrastructure cores that underlie the
    jurisdiction's research ecosystem, including development, enhancement,
    and/or sustainability of research facilities, higher education
    pathways, workforce development, economic development, and use-inspired
    research.
        NSF recognizes that building sustained research capacity in all
    states and territories is critical to our long-term competitiveness.
    NSF's Growing Research Access for Nationally Transformative Equity and
    Diversity (GRANTED) program will improve the Nation's research support
    and service capacity at emerging and underserved research institutions.
    Last week, NSF announced an investment of $9.2 million in funding for a
    collaborative project between Emory University and the National
    Organization of Research Development Professionals (NORDP), a
    professional nonprofit association dedicated to advancing the research
    capacity and impact of colleges and universities. Together they will
    expand support to 16 minority-serving institutions by providing
    extensive consulting time from experienced NORDP consultants over the
    next two years and access to an array of tools and services to improve
    research development. This investment will provide direct research
    development services to participating institutions, including grant
    writing assistance, team building, strategic research planning,
    outreach activities, and student training. The program is specifically
    designed to provide a significant investment to intentionally small
    cohorts of institutions to ensure a lasting impact.
    Conclusion
        At a time of intense international competition, NSF's ability to
    generate more breakthroughs and foster more innovations that strengthen
    our economy and national security is critical to keeping the United
    States a global leader in science, engineering, and technology. As NSF
    continues to implement the CHIPS and Science Act, we are doing so with
    a focus on expanding opportunities for all types of institutions, in
    every geographic region, in every key technology area, and for everyone
    who wants to engage in STEM -while through leveraging partnerships with
    industry and philanthropies.
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. With the
    continued support of this Committee and Congress, and through
    successful implementation of the CHIPS and Science Act, NSF stands
    ready to strengthen our national and economic security and create
    innovation anywhere and opportunities everywhere.

        The Chair. Thank you, Director.
        Colleagues, note that a vote has started. We are going to
    have a couple of votes this afternoon, so I will just ask you
    to use your discretion where you are in the queue to go back
    and forth and try to maximize time.
        I am going to turn it over to my colleague, Senator Schatz.
    And go vote, and then come back. And he will chair the meeting
    and go to Senator Cruz after that.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII

        Senator Schatz. Thank you, Chair, Ranking Member.
        Director Panchanathan, thank you for being here. I want to
    follow up on a conversation we had earlier this year. I know
    that you made $6.5 million available in Fiscal Year 2023 for
    the continued development of the Thirty Meter Telescope. What
    are your plans for continuing the funding and the work to
    design TMT in fiscal 2024?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you very much, Senator Schatz, and
    I really enjoyed talking to you and visiting the great State of
    Hawaii recently. We launched the telescope, as you know, the
    solar telescope in Maui, which is the world's largest solar
    telescope, and I am very proud that we have it located in Maui,
    we are doing great science.
        To your specific question, I am happy to tell you, as you
    said, just last week, NSF made a $6.5 million award to the
    Giant Magellan Telescope, for GMT, and a $6.5 million award to
    the Thirty Meter Telescope International Organization, (TMT),
    to continue development and reduce risk on crucial optical and
    mechanical components.
        I want to tell you that there is a process that we take as
    we embark on large awards, and this includes, not only the
    Astro2020 Decadal Survey recommendations that came,
    consultations with our scientific community, and advisory
    committees, as well as our Mathematical Physical Sciences
    Directorate, making sure that we are prioritizing these
    investments, working with our National Science Board, and so
    now we are investing in the design and development phase, and
    that was this investment; so we have plans in terms of how do
    we move from here to the final design review and then the
    investment.
        Senator Schatz. So that is 2023?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Yes.
        Senator Schatz. You are mostly talking about 2023. So what
    are your plans for 2024?
        Dr. Panchanathan. In 2024, we have budgeted again to
    continue with this process, and we have asked for $30 million
    of investment so that we will be able to move these projects
    forward as these review processes happen. And at the same time,
    I would like to place this in front of Congress. You know that
    in the CHIPS and Science Act, the science provisions were
    authorizations, not appropriations yet. We need that also in
    place so that we might be in the vanguard of innovation and
    scientific discovery, for which instrumentation like TMT and
    GMT are very important as we think about the future.
        Senator Schatz. Thank you. Now, talk to me about
    construction funds for 2025. Obviously, you are talking about
    design. Where are we on construction, and can we work together
    on the Pathway? I understand there a lot of it is contingent.
    You have Astro2020; you have the Scientific Review process.
        Dr. Panchanathan. Yes.
        Senator Schatz. We obviously don't have it squared away on
    the Hawaii side of this, but we have to move in parallel paths
    in case everything comes together. So where are you with 2025
    and construction money for ELT?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Again, thank you for that. And yes, you
    are right. We are going through the process that we typically
    go through in the Major Research Facilities Instrumentation. So
    we are looking at the 2024, 2025, and beyond in terms of what
    is the right positioning for the request to be made for the
    construction project.
        Right now, we have to go through the final design review.
    And as you said, rightly, we are working with the State of
    Hawaii to make sure that we are positioning the appropriate
    investments in a way that they can, you know, be sequenced at
    the right time. So it is our--we are still working through the
    2025, and we will be working through 2026 budgets to think
    through when the appropriate time is for putting in the
    construction request.
        But the final design review we have to also go through as
    we are thinking about how we are moving forward in this
    process. And we will be working closely with the National
    Science Board on this.
        And Senator, as we have always done, we will keep your
    staff closely informed and closely engaged to ensure that you
    are getting all the answers that you need.
        Senator Schatz. Thank you very much.
        Senator Cruz.
        Senator Cruz. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Secretary Raimondo, the National Environmental Policy Act,
    or NEPA, the NEPA reviews are currently required for CHIPS
    grants, and that could lengthen project timelines by two years
    or more from the date the Department decides to start an
    environmental impact statement. Some NEPA reports aren't
    completed for 7 years or longer.
        When you were asked about hurdles posed by NEPA to CHIPS
    projects in a House hearing last month, you pointed out, quote,
    ``There is currently a bipartisan amendment to the Defense
    Authorization Act which would help a lot. So we are going to do
    everything we can with our team to help streamline NEPA and
    move it as quickly as is prudent, but if Congress could pass
    the amendment, I think it is the Cruz-Kelly Amendment in the
    Authorization Act, it would help us a lot to move faster.''
        As you know, that bipartisan amendment passed the Senate
    with overwhelming bipartisan support, but it is not yet law. It
    still has to pass the House, and ultimately be signed into law
    by the President. Could you briefly describe the benefits the
    amendment would provide as a word of encouragement to the House
    and the White House to make it law?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes, thank you. And thank you for your
    leadership on that, as you say, each of these projects, if they
    receive Federal money, would be subject to NEPA, which could
    take up to years. We do not have years. These are national
    security imperative projects, which is why I, again, thank you
    for your leadership. What we are doing, we have built a team on
    the CHIPS Team in the Commerce Department just to focus on
    permitting, to help companies, help states streamline the
    process, accelerate the process within the existing statute.
        Let me be clear; we don't want to--you know, environmental
    concerns matter. We are not in any way suggesting that we
    should do anything that hurts the environment or is
    unsustainable. That being said, we do need to, which your
    amendment would do, streamline the process, speed the process,
    make the process more efficient and user-friendly.
        Interestingly, earlier today, I was on the phone with
    members of the House on this exact issue, encouraging them to
    do their own--you know, take your lead and pass something in
    the House. My view is it is essential. We are going to do
    everything we can. We have a team, we are working on it, but
    without the legislation, it is very difficult.
        Senator Cruz. Well, that is very helpful. Thank you. Let me
    turn to the topic of spectrum, something both you and I care a
    lot about. We all know that the United States needs more
    commercial access to mid-band spectrum. Recent studies project
    that U.S. mobile traffic to increase more than two-and-a-half
    times over the next 5 years, and almost sixfold in the next 10
    years. We need a real mid-band spectrum pipeline so that the
    U.S. can dominate in 5G and not fall behind our adversaries.
        Unfortunately, access to mid-band spectrum has become
    almost impossible to come by because so much of the Nation's
    spectrum is under the control of Federal agencies who are
    resistant to sharing. The Defense Department recently completed
    its report on opening access to spectrum in the lower 3
    gigahertz band and gave it to your Department at the end of
    last week. The report has not been made public, but according
    to leaks, the report does not support sharing, let alone
    allowing full power 5G use of the band.
        Secretary Raimondo, you and I had a very productive call
    yesterday, and during that call, you committed to sharing the
    report with me, briefing me on it. I appreciate that. Do you
    agree that we need more mid-band spectrum to be made available
    for 5G, including for full-power use, and that it is not only
    imperative for our economy but also for our national security?
        Secretary Raimondo. I do. Let me say this. As I said
    yesterday, I think--I would be very happy to have my staff, the
    NTIA, and the DoD, I think we should do it together, to come
    and go through the report. So we will set that up.
        Senator Cruz. I appreciate that.
        Secretary Raimondo. And yes, I do. I spoke with Secretary
    Austin last week, and I said the DoD needs the spectrum; they
    need to execute their mission, period. Having said that, we
    also need to be more creative and innovative about how we share
    spectrum and how we use spectrum, because the truth of the
    matter is our national defense depends on, as you say,
    continued private sector innovation, and continued innovation
    in 5G.
        And my point to him, my point to you, and anyone who wants
    to hear from me is that this shouldn't be a zero-sum game,
    right. We shouldn't think every time the DoD shares or gives
    something up, they are losing capacity. We have to find
    creative ways where we can have more spectrum made available in
    the mid-range band, as you say, and also, the DoD has what they
    need to do their mission. I am committed to working with you
    and with them to do that.
        Senator Cruz. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
        Director Panchanathan, during Fiscal Year 2021 and Fiscal
    Year 2022, the NSF funded some 70 grants and two contracts
    totaling over $45 million focused on both the quote/unquote
    ``Science of countering social media mis- and disinformation,
    as well as the development of digital tools to track and censor
    so-called mis- or disinformation.''
        One of the projects was called ``Expert Voices Together'',
    and it is, to quote the NSF, ``Creating a comprehensive system
    of care that addresses the harms journalists experienced due to
    online harassment.'' Its mission, incredibly enough, is to,
    ``Support journalists in moments of crisis while helping the
    media industry build resilience long-term''; in other words,
    taxpayer-funded therapy for left-wing journalists who find
    actual facts traumatizing. I am sure people like Taylor Lorenz
    will be excited about that.
        But where on earth in the NSF's mandate is there a
    justification for these sorts of projects? And do you believe
    that venturing into such politicized topics undermines broader
    support for the NSF?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Senator, first of all, let me tell you
    that the reach--I hope that through the hearing today, you will
    get to see NSF's broad impact all across our Nation through
    STEM talent development, through economic vibrancy that NSF
    makes possible, and yes, national security objectives also
    being fostered. I hope that the examples that I will give you
    in the answer, I am not trying to package all of that, but I
    hope that, you know, that will come through very clearly. We
    are doing a lot of work about how to make sure the talent
    everywhere and innovation everywhere is energized.
        Senator Cruz. Could you answer the question, though, that I
    asked.
        Dr. Panchanathan. Yes, I am just going to come to that,
    Senator. Because I just want to make sure that the NSF mission
    is--you know, I just want to make sure that that is clearly
    understood also. You know, I want to say one thing very
    categorically: We do not--NSF does not engage in censorship, we
    do not regulate any content, and engage with anybody who also
    does so.
        But what we do is, how do the technologies operate and how
    are they being used? And provide the public and policymakers
    the information that they need so that you can make the
    informed decisions about needed regulations and guardrails. And
    for the users, that they have the tool that they can safely
    navigate content. That is what NSF is engaged in, that is the
    kind of projects that we fund. We are not in the business of
    censorship. We are not in the business of controlling content.
        I can tell you, for example, even in this conversation that
    we are having right now, in the deep-fake realm, this
    conversation can be completely altered and presented in a form
    that you and I will say: How did it even happen that this
    conversation that we are having right now has been transformed
    into something that is even unrecognizable? These kinds of
    things that happen, we are trying to find how can we build, how
    can we invest in those projects, and how can we invest in tools
    and techniques that can help safeguard. And that is all we are
    doing. We are not censoring. And I want to repeat that we are
    not altering content.
        Senator Cruz. When you are funding others who are engaged
    in censorship, you are undermining support for your very
    important agency.
        Dr. Panchanathan. Senator, maybe I can close with this
    comment. I am happy to work with any of you to go through this
    with you in more of a one-on-one setting, and explain what
    these projects are doing so it can be helpful. Happy to take
    your suggestions, happy to take your inputs, NSF, I always say,
    NSF is a learning agency. We learn constantly because we cannot
    be an agency that says, this is how we do it. We are a learning
    agency. So happy to take the input and see where, if any, you
    find that there is, you know, NSF appearing to be, as I have
    said, we are not, but I am happy to have the discussion with
    you.
        Senator Cruz. Thank you.
        The Chair. Senator Tester.

                     STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA

        Senator Tester. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I appreciate
    the flexibility. Gina and Panch, thank you both for being here.
    I appreciate the work you have done, I appreciate everything
    you are doing to bring jobs back to this country, and I
    appreciate everything you are doing on the national security
    front. Look, for decades we have outsourced jobs in this
    country, and it hasn't been a good idea.
        The Chinese Communist Party is our facing threat, and you
    both know this, both economically, and militarily, and they
    want to take our place on the world stage. But I have faith in
    this country, and I have faith in our ability to be able to
    emerge from a time when we have outsourced our jobs to time,
    and we can bring the jobs back here again and create what we
    need in this country to meet the needs of this country.
        A little over 2 years ago, Congress started debating the
    CHIPS and Science Act. I started talking to a group of
    Montanans about building a technology hub in Montana using the
    Regional Technology Innovation Hubs Initiative that this
    committee created. The vision for this tech hub would be to
    establish Montana's well-established photonics industry and
    grow it into a world-class center that can out-compete everyone
    in technology, and it is critical to our economic growth and
    national security.
        Madam Chair, I am blown away by the effort that Montanans
    have put forth on this opportunity. Our best and our brightest
    have worked together, universities, labor groups, financial
    groups, state government, have all have worked to craft a Tech
    Hub Plan that works for our state, but most importantly, works
    for this country.
        Like any state, funding for universities is not what it
    should be. And so these universities are used to fighting and
    beating the hell out of one another to get the money they
    needed, and the truth is, is we have watched them work
    together.
        I come from a state that was built over a hundred years ago
    by people who moved in where there was no grass, and built
    farms, where there was just grass, and built communities, and
    built churches, and built hospitals. And now, the people in
    this state of Montana are working together to make sure that
    Montana can reclaim what we need to have, from a technology
    standpoint, to be the Nation's or the world's leader.
        So my question is this, to both of you: When it comes to
    rural America, Congress has addressed it in a certain--in
    several different ways, but you both lead implementation of
    programs at your respective agencies, how do you address the
    issue of rural America and making sure that your initiatives
    will work for rural America and do not leave them behind? I
    don't care which one goes first. Go ahead.
        Secretary Raimondo. Thank you. I will go first, and I will
    be brief. We, as I said earlier, we have been overwhelmed by
    the quality and quantity of the tech hub applications. As you
    recall, it was authorized for $10 billion. We received $500
    million, and we have over 400 applications. So if you come away
    with nothing else, clearly this is worthy of more funding.
        We will do a minimum of 20 Tech Hubs, possibly more, and I
    promise you some will be rural. I cannot promise you it will be
    Montana, but I promise you some will be rural.
        Senator Tester. I was hoping for a different answer. But
    keep going.
        Secretary Raimondo. I know that. I know, but I am trying to
    be honest here. I promise we will look at yours and all of
    yours, and there will be rural representation. We are
    determined to do it; the statute requires it. We are doing a
    huge amount of outreach. I tell my team there is no substitute
    for showing up. Show up in rural communities, let them know we
    are there, and help them to put forward a good application. So
    we are highly conscious of it, and we are doing a lot of
    outreach.
        Look, the only thing I would say is if we pick, say, 20,
    hypothetically, 20, every one of those would be worthy of, say,
    a $100 million grant to really move the needle and create a
    hub, that is $2 billion. We have $500 million, and you have
    authorized $10 billion (ph.). So I guarantee you we are focused
    on rural. I guarantee you, you will be pleased with the
    results, and I guarantee you this program is worthy of more
    funding.
        Senator Tester. Thank you. Panch?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you very much, Senator. It was
    great meeting with you. And when I spoke to you, and I want to
    reinforce that NSF's commitment of energizing talent and ideas
    everywhere across our Nation is in full force and is actioned
    everywhere now, even as we speak.
        But let me address specific things related to your question
    about two projects that even just got funded very recently, in
    terms of unleashing innovation in the State of Montana. This is
    to Montana State University in Bozeman; they are leading an NSF
    Engines Development Award. These awards are meant to bring all
    of the innovative capacity in every region to see how we can
    lift them up through partnerships, as well as NSF seeding
    investments. That then can then further be built with the
    higher level of NSF Type 2 Awards. And partnering with Commerce
    and EDA, we have signed an MOU of regional technology hubs, how
    we can work together. We are like this, we are not like this
    anymore.
        [Interlocking fingers of both hands.]
        Dr. Panchanathan. You know, Secretary Raimondo will agree
    with, you know, the fact that because of her leadership and her
    commitment to working in partnership, the two of us are working
    closely together, our Departments are working closely together,
    and we don't want anything to fall in between. So this project,
    for example, is focused on advancing quantum and supporting
    technologies in the northern intermountain States of Montana,
    Wyoming, and Idaho.
        There is another one, which is University of Montana in
    Missoula, is leading the NSF Engines Development focused on
    advancing Precision Forestry, which is, you would agree, there
    is much more in place innovation and range land technologies.
    So these are just--the awards that were made just a few weeks
    ago, so you can see that we are constantly exploring options,
    working with the communities to see what we can do in terms of
    talent development, as well as innovation, and energization.
        Senator Tester. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        The Chair. Senator Wicker.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER WICKER,
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI

        Senator Wicker. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, and
    thanks to our two witnesses. I bet neither one of you is
    surprised that we have had questions already about rural
    America. And so Dr. Panch, let me just ask you, since you were
    specific to Montana, which is a state I really admire, could
    you tell us the EPSCoR part of the legislation, how that is
    already, perhaps, benefiting researchers in other rural states?
    And that won't be the last----
        Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you very much, Senator, for posing
    that question. First of all, thank you for hosting me in the
    great State of Mississippi.
        Senator Wicker. Yes. Thank you. And I believe Mississippi
    was the first state where we were able----
        Dr. Panchanathan. That is the first state we had the NSF
    Day Celebration, right?
        Senator Wicker. Yes.
        Dr. Panchanathan. So it was a great launch effort, and it
    was wonderful to meet all the different institutions in the
    State of Mississippi, community colleges, all the higher
    education institutions coming together, and that we were able
    to interact with the researchers and students.
        Now, to the State of Mississippi, I saw firsthand, and this
    confirmed my belief that talent and ideas are democratized, and
    they are everywhere. Now, in the State of Mississippi, we have
    now invested, and I am going to go through a few projects in
    the State of Mississippi, again, very recent ones. Again, the
    NSF Engines Development Award, the first of those to Jackson
    State University, focused on advancing food security and
    climate resilience.
        Senator Wicker. We have a new Senator who is alum of
    Jackson State.
        Dr. Panchanathan. That is right. And then the next one is
    to Mississippi State University in Starkville, where we were
    together. This is advancing autonomous technologies for
    advanced manufacturing. We talked about this when we were
    together with the researchers there. In addition to that, we
    have invested almost a million dollars in the Mississippi Gulf
    Coast Community College on two projects, to broaden
    participation in emerging technology programs, as well as
    increasing the supply and diversity of the IT workforce in the
    Mississippi Gulf Coast region.
        These are real projects making a real difference in terms
    of unearthing the talent and ideas in Mississippi and to the
    EPSCoR targets that you and I had a discussion. If you recall,
    in your office, we said--you asked me the question: Do you
    think that you will meet those targets for Fiscal Year 2023 and
    then going on to Fiscal Year 2029? I am happy to report to you
    today, in Fiscal Year 2023, we not only met, but we exceeded
    the target. And that these are mutually beneficial.
        Senator Wicker. Well, thank you very much, and you may want
    to supplement your answer further. Let me just say, I really
    don't think this legislation would have passed so easily had we
    not been able to include the EPSCoR provision. And I do want to
    thank the Chair for her help, on a bipartisan basis, in that
    regard.
        And Madam Secretary, you may want to answer, on the record,
    about Rural America. But let me go ahead and see if I can
    follow up on something that Senator Cruz mentioned. Do I
    understand that you have, you and your office, have seen the
    completed report concerning the Lower 3 Gigahertz Study?
        Secretary Raimondo. We got it at the end of last week, yes.
    Yes, we got it at the end of last week.
        Senator Wicker. OK. And so do I understand you to say that
    there are areas of the report that you disagree with?
        Secretary Raimondo. I have not gone through it all myself,
    so you could not understand me saying that. We received it, I
    think, on Friday.
        Senator Wicker. OK. Well, what did you say with that
    regard?
        Secretary Raimondo. What I said is this, we need to do a
    better job of being more creative in figuring out ways to have
    more of that mid-band spectrum available for commercial use to
    power innovation in ways that do not interfere with, or in any
    way degrade the DoD's mission.
        Senator Wicker. OK. Well, let me just say I agree with that
    statement that you just made as you had--as you said it. And to
    the extent that the report coming from the Department of
    Defense is more restrictive in that regard, I would have a
    problem with that; when are Members of the Committee and
    Members of the Senate going to be able to see this report?
        Secretary Raimondo. As I said, we just received it, I
    think, on Friday of last week. We are going through it now, and
    I would be happy to follow up, and we will have a briefing
    schedule where the DoD, and NTIA can come over whenever you
    want.
        Senator Wicker. Madam Chair. I do like the idea of a
    briefing. I really think it is less formal, and there is more
    of an opportunity for give and take.
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
        Senator Wicker. But I think to the extent you say there is
    room for both sides to benefit and for neither side to have a
    loss, and I even--I am reluctant to say ``side'', either
    Department or area of endeavor to have a loss, that is not
    necessary in splitting the blanket in this regard.
        Secretary Raimondo. That is my point. I think historically
    the debate has been approached. Anytime DoD gives up anything,
    it is a loss, and I think we have to modernize our thinking.
    There are ways that, if we are creative, they can have
    everything they need, and also we must make more available for
    private innovation because that advances national security as
    well.
        Senator Wicker. National security benefits from both. Thank
    you. And thank you, Madam Chair.
        The Chair. Thank you, Senator. We will take you up on the
    briefing.
        Secretary Raimondo. Sounds excellent.
        The Chair. Thank you. Senator Klobuchar.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA

        Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Chair Cantwell. It
    is good to see both of you. Secretary, thank you so much for
    your visit to Bloomington, Minnesota.
        Secretary Raimondo. It was great.
        Senator Klobuchar. You are a big hit there, and at
    Normandale Community College, and I think you saw there that we
    are one of just a few states that have a full existing
    semiconductor supply chain: design, fab foundries, toolmakers,
    integrators, gas chemical producers, testing, packaging, you
    name it. Could you talk about how the Commerce Department is
    working to support smaller companies looking to get involved in
    that supply chain?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes, I loved the visit. So thank you
    for having me. Of the $39 billion, we have said about $10
    billion will be used for mature legacy and supply chain. So
    there will be a great deal of money available for smaller
    companies and supply chain companies, like some of the ones
    that we met with. You know, I can assure you that that will
    happen. And just as I said earlier, we have received 500
    statements of interest from, I think, 42 states, and over 100
    applications or pre-applications. Many of those are smaller
    companies, supply chain companies, so rest assured that we are
    looking at those opportunities, not just the very biggest
    companies that we all know about.
        Senator Klobuchar. All right, thank you. And then, given
    that you visited our community college there, Normandale
    Community College, can you talk about, given that we need
    100,000 new semiconductor technicians, and another 140,000
    people in the trades to build semiconductor manufacturing
    facilities, and I think we have a shortfall of about 300,000
    engineers, 90,000 skilled technicians in the U.S., could you
    talk about the importance of community colleges, and one-and 2-
    year degrees, and all of this?
        Secretary Raimondo. So one of the most exciting facts, I
    think, in the time that the bill was signed between then and
    now, we know of at least 50 community colleges in 19 states
    that have announced new programs to help American workers find
    jobs in the semiconductor industry. I mean, I think that is
    amazing, just the fact that the passage of the bill, community
    colleges are mobilizing to say: How do we fill the gap of
    100,000 technicians that we are currently short?
        We, of course, will be establishing the National
    Semiconductor Technology Center, and a huge component of that
    will be workforce, and we will do that in collaboration with
    the NSF. And community--I should say, everyone has a role to
    play; high schools with careers in technical education,
    community colleges have a huge role to play, 4-year colleges,
    Ph.D. programs, up and down the ladder. I think community
    colleges, though, in training technicians, cyber technicians,
    processing analysts, et cetera, have a particular role to play,
    and we are already working with them.
        Senator Klobuchar. Well, thank you, and what a great
    transition.
        Quickly to Director Panch, you mentioned all degrees, and I
    know that you are going to be visiting the University of
    Minnesota. You met the interim president when you were
    visiting, Secretary. Could you talk about, I know they are one
    of the finalists in the NSF Regional Innovation Engines
    Program. In your view, how can public-private partnerships, Dr.
    Panch, help to accelerate innovation?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Very, very important to have public-
    private partnerships. In fact, our Regional Innovation Engine
    Program was created with the explicit purpose of how we might
    bring all of the component parts together to ensure that the
    innovation is completely, you know, energized and catalyzed.
        So our Regional Innovation Engines Program, 44 awards have
    been made, where 46 states and territories are involved in
    this. Every one of those awards has a number of industry
    partners, state governments being--partnering in that, and
    sometimes even non-governmental organizations, NGOs being
    partners in that. And we have, of course, community colleges,
    technical colleges, K-12 institutions, as well as universities,
    research universities. So this is exceedingly important.
        Let me give you a couple of examples if this will
    illustrate the point very clearly. We earlier talked about, you
    know, 6G and 5G. We call it the NextG, let us say. So the
    Resilience Intelligent Next Generation System, or the RINGS
    Program has 35 companies participating in the RINGS Program,
    and the total amount of resources that they bring to the table
    is $50 million in-kind and actual investments. NSF matched that
    with another $50 million to now have a very robust program of
    looking at: How do we build the next-generation networks,
    including rural broadband being made accessible so that talent
    and ideas can have access to all the content that we are
    generating all across our nation?
        So to the community college, because you asked that
    question, I cannot but help tell you about this community
    college, Hennepin Technical College.
        Senator Klobuchar. Yes, that is in my state.
        Dr. Panchanathan. It is leading an NSF Advanced Technical
    Education, ATE, this program has been invoked for a long time,
    essentially community colleges, which are invested in for new
    curriculum, model curriculum, as well as in terms of students.
        Senator Klobuchar. OK. Very good. Thank you. And we look
    forward to your visit.
        Dr. Panchanathan. I look forward to being with you.
        Senator Klobuchar. We expect you to be wearing a Gophers'
    hat when you are there, just to bother Senator Fischer with her
    Nebraska Team.
        Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you.
        Senator Klobuchar. But I also want to thank the Chairwoman
    for her incredible leadership on this bill. We wouldn't be
    where we are today if it wasn't for Senator Cantwell. Thanks.
        The Chair. Senator Fischer. Thank you, Amy.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. DEB FISCHER,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA

        Senator Fischer. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman; and thank you
    to both of our witnesses for being here today. Between your two
    agencies, you have received more than $54 billion in
    appropriations under the CHIPS and Science Act so far. This is
    an enormous amount of taxpayer money.
        Earlier this year, the Commerce Department's Inspector
    General described the novel challenges facing the
    implementation of CHIPS. The IG highlighted the need for new
    controls and appropriate oversight for this unprecedented
    influx of funding, stating that it, quote, ``May require
    additional monitoring and reporting to ensure project
    recipients comply with statutes, achieve intended outcomes, and
    use funds efficiently.''
        The Inspector General has also noted that contract and
    grant fraud now account for 65 percent of the OIG's Department
    of Commerce cases. Before fiscal 2021, they represented roughly
    35 percent.
        Secretary Raimondo, have you planned to implement any
    specific oversight measures to respond to this concerning
    development that we are seeing?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Thank you, Senator, and thank you
    for the question. You are absolutely right. This is
    unprecedented. The Commerce Department has never implemented
    anything of this size, and I take that responsibility
    incredibly seriously. I have a job to achieve national security
    goals and to protect taxpayer money, and we aim to do both, to
    be a steward of taxpayer money. We are building a team. Since
    the time the bill passed, we have built a team of about 150
    professionals. I would invite you to meet them anytime. They
    are incredibly talented people, and we are building a risk team
    specifically devoted to the issues that you highlight.
        The Risk Team is of risk professionals to make sure we are
    evaluating all the risk, and also after we put the money out,
    to make sure that the companies are doing what they said they
    would do. Also, we don't plan to put the money out to these
    companies in one lump sum, we plan to put it out on milestone-
    based achievement. So some money, see what they do.
        So we are going to be massively transparent, provide
    notice, as we are required to do to Congress, for investments
    of $10 million or more, and have--we are doing an incredible
    amount of due diligence, all of which will be documented. And
    as I said, have a whole team devoted to management of risk and
    compliance of the companies to the promises that they make us
    in exchange for the money.
        Senator Fischer. In this report, were there any patterns
    that emerged? You know, when you see that increase in fraud,
    were there any patterns, anything specific that companies may
    be doing that would be red flags to be able to help this risk
    team to be able to identify them at an earlier time?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes. It is a great question. And of
    course, something that we are obsessed with, always trying to
    get better? No, not particularly. As was said earlier, look,
    putting $50 billion of taxpayer money out in partnership with
    private sector companies is a challenge. And so I don't think
    there is any one answer. I can simply tell you the team we have
    is built with professionals that have 10, 20, 30 years of
    experience in track record. We are building new systems, whole
    new systems of due diligence, compliance.
        Every company, for example, will have to give us a security
    plan, an R&D plan, a financial plan, open their books to us,
    share their finances with us, and we will use all of that
    information to hold them accountable.
        Senator Fischer. You mentioned that you are putting money
    out, like first payments, second payments to be able to----
        Secretary Raimondo. Exactly.
        Senator Fischer.--to be able to keep track of it easier. If
    you would see anything that was questionable there, can you
    cancel grants?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Yes. We could claw back money,
    depending on the situation. Like, for example, if they violated
    the China Guardrails, or we could--we would not fund the next
    tranche if they didn't meet the conditions that were required.
        Senator Fischer. Right. I would be negligent if I didn't
    put in a plug for Nebraska as well, since we are going down the
    dais here to be able to get a plug in for Nebraska, and the
    good things that we see. I do have a question, though, on how
    do you define what a region is?
        And then also, Dr. Panch, if you could say nice things
    about my state.
        [Laughing].
        Senator Fischer. Look it up.
        Dr. Panchanathan. Yes, we have it. Ready to go whenever you
    are.
        Senator Fischer. So how do you define a region?
        Secretary Raimondo. Well, for the tech hubs, we have to
    have several awardees within each of the EDA's regions. So the
    Economic Development Agency has, statutorily, several regions
    around the country, and we have to have some tech hubs in each
    region.
        Dr. Panchanathan. So Senator, first of all, NSF had, of
    this investment that was made of CHIPS and Science, NSF got
    $200 million over 5 years. The science portion of NSF's is
    still an authorization, not an appropriation. We are hoping
    that we will have the investment that is planned, and the
    authorizations to become appropriations, but we are not waiting
    for that to energize the innovation all across the nation, as
    you heard, that I mentioned that.
        The $200 million is being used in order to be able to
    generate the 100,000 semiconductor technicians, workers,
    researchers that our Nation needs very rapidly. The Secretary
    talked about what we need by 2030, but it is about the fact
    that it is even beyond 2030. So NSF is working toward that. And
    for partnership, again, to your earlier question, public-
    private partnerships, we are working with the consortium of
    companies, Micron, Intel, Samsung, Ericsson, and others.
        To the state of Nebraska, since you asked. So we are very
    thrilled, again, NSF's investments span all parts of our
    nation, energizing community colleges, universities, and so on.
    Let me give you a couple of examples from Nebraska. So the
    University of Nebraska, EPSCoR, or to track one award, which is
    $20 million for the period of 2021-2026, is participating in
    the second quantum revolution by launching an
    interdisciplinary, interdepartmental, and multi-campus research
    and education cluster focused on Emergent Quantum Materials and
    Technologies, called EQUATE, this essentially to increase the
    jurisdiction's competitiveness in the area of quantum science
    and technologies, as one example.
        There is another project, again, which we have an award to
    the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, which is a companion to the
    Large Hadron Collider work that is happening. So here we are
    essentially supporting a CMS detector and supporting software
    being developed at the University of Nebraska.
        So clearly, again, I want to reemphasize this point, you
    are going to tire of me saying this: Talent and ideas are
    everywhere, and it is our responsibility to find them, nurture
    them, motivate them, and bring them to life. That is the only
    way we are going to outcompete other nations.
        Senator Fischer. Thank you. There is no place like
    Nebraska. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        The Chair. Senator Hickenlooper, I am going to ask you to
    chair while I run and vote. And then, following you will be
    Senator Moran.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN HICKENLOOPER,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO

        Senator Hickenlooper. And Senator Fischer, I will put in a
    plug for Nebraska as well, but only after I put in a plug for
    Colorado.
        Thank you, Madam Chair. And it is great to see such a crowd
    here. I feel a little bit like we are at Sunday Night Football
    with Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce. I haven't seen this many
    people in this room in quite a while. But Dr. Panchanathan, I
    know that you attract a crowd, and that you have really devoted
    yourself to these issues.
        And Secretary Raimondo, just for you, other Senators should
    know that we were--we overlapped as Governors, and I don't
    think there is another Governor that had as strong bipartisan
    support, because she made decisions not from a political
    perspective, but what is the best outcome. And she stole our
    best ideas. We stole her best ideas. That is sort of the way
    the Governor's world works.
        So we will start with you, Secretary Raimondo. As a former
    Governor, I appreciate the recognition in your Department that
    innovation and workforce development thrive when local
    communities have an active seat, not just a seat, but an active
    seat at the table. And we have been listening to the needs of
    our communities, and I think Colorado has positioned itself as
    a leader in startup creation, and supporting entrepreneurs,
    generating a diverse workforce in a range of technology fields,
    advanced manufacturing, cybersecurity, clean energy, quantum.
        So I don't have to go on. I think the other Senators have
    done a good job of pitching their states. I don't have to go on
    in either of these questions, regional hubs, or the regional
    innovation engines, why Colorado is so well-suited. But I do
    think, I would like to ask both of you to describe how the
    Department and NSF, how will you coordinate complementary
    regional tech hubs and regional innovation engines?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Senator, let me start. Even before the
    CHIPS and Science Act, Secretary Raimondo and I, as soon as she
    took office, we spoke the very next week and said that we are
    going to hyper-partner, if there is a term like that, because
    we believe that this is in the interest of our nation, of the
    taxpayers who invest in both our agencies and departments. So
    we have been--at NSF, in fact, we have a CHIPS Steering
    Committee, which is the Office of the Director, that works
    almost on a daily basis, and a weekly basis of synchronization
    with the Secretary's Office and their Steering Committee.
        So every program that the Secretary talked about, you know,
    the National Science and Technology Centers, the workforce
    development activities, the EDA activities, the Regional
    Technology Hubs, every one of those activities are highly
    coordinated. In fact, when the Regional Technology Hubs'
    announcement was being made, even the verbiage of the
    announcement was coordinated between NSF and Commerce, and vice
    versa.
        So that is the level of coordination we have because we
    believe that we don't want to lose any of these innovations and
    innovators by having any of these valleys of death, as we call
    them. So we are making sure that we are tightening those gaps
    so that we can carry the innovation all the way from
    fundamental research to applied translational work, to then
    into the innovation outcomes that we seek.
        Secretary Raimondo. Just one quick addition to that, and I
    agree, and it was very, very well said. Everyone knows, if you
    talk to industry and academia, everyone will tell you, NSF's
    job training programs are, you know, world-class, the
    curriculum, the approach. So we want to learn from that and
    then, of course, expand it because we now have all of this
    additional money.
        But in the NSTC, for example, which we are going to
    establish this fall, NSF is a founding member of that. So we
    are really trying to bake in the NSF to everything we do and,
    frankly, leverage all of their great work, especially around
    workforce training.
        Senator Hickenlooper. You are way ahead of us, and that is
    very, very encouraging.
        Gina, Secretary Raimondo, the CHIPS and for Science directs
    the Office of Science and Technology Policy to develop the
    Interagency National Science and Technology Strategy to
    establish national research goals, especially in terms of
    emerging technologies. And we have been looking at how
    research, and standards, new commercial applications in the
    field of AI, are going to transform, not just our economy, but
    our global competitiveness. So I thought it would be useful
    just to get what priorities does the Department see are
    important in this kind of forthcoming strategy to reflect in
    the field of AI?
        Secretary Raimondo. So we should visit on this when we have
    more than 19 seconds to talk about it. But NIST, as you well
    know, NIST is the standard-setting body. They are kind of the
    lead agency now in the Administration's work on AI. They have
    already put out their Risk Management Framework, which is
    voluntary risk guides for developers developing AI. And the
    special sauce of NIST is that, because they are a neutral third
    party, everyone trusts them. So industry will collaborate with
    them, universities will collaborate with them. And that is the
    entity that will be forming the new standards.
        And you know, candidly, I know I am out of time. I think,
    you know, there will be a U.S.-led ecosystem, and we need--of
    AI, we lead the world, and we need to make sure that the
    standards that fuel that are consistent with our democratic
    values. So we can have a further discussion.
        Senator Hickenlooper. No, absolutely. And I agree
    completely. And I think NIST, just to our large audience, I
    think NIST is one of the most effective organizations we have
    in the Government. I think they do a remarkable job at an
    almost impossible job. I mean, the remarkable success at an
    almost impossible job. All right, I will yield. But I get to
    ask questions later because now I am chairing, so I will get to
    come back.
        Senator Thune.
        Senator Thune. Mr. Chair, I would yield to my colleague
    that is down, just to my right, Senator Moran, who has been
    waiting patiently.
        Senator Hickenlooper. Senator Moran.
        Senator Thune. Very patiently, to ask questions.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY MORAN,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM KANSAS

        Senator Moran. Thank you, Senator Thune, for yielding. And
    thank you to the Director and to the Secretary for your
    presence with us today and the work that you are doing to
    implement the Science and CHIPS Act.
        I would not take up my time, very much of my time, anyway,
    to reiterate what has been said time and time again in regard
    to rural and small business. Thank you, Director. We might have
    a conversation in the future about, I am pleased with the
    EPSCoR, that you met the standard goal. I would be interested
    in knowing if there are challenges that you will face in
    continuing to meet that or exceed that goal in the future?
        Secretary Raimondo, could you update the Committee on your
    efforts to ensure rural states and small businesses benefit
    from the CHIPS and Science Act, particularly via the Tech Hubs
    and CHIPS Program?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes, thank you, Senator. So as I said,
    we will be putting up the Tech Hub designations this fall, and
    we will ensure that there will be geographic representation,
    including rural representation. Much of that is because we have
    been doing outreach to rural communities to let them know the
    money exists. We want them to apply, and to help them apply. As
    I said before, it is so oversubscribed that I have no doubt
    there will be rural places we would have liked to have invested
    in that we won't be able to.
        With the CHIPS part of it, just last week, we put out a
    funding opportunity for small and medium-sized supply chain
    companies. And I promise you, we are going to work overtime to
    have small suppliers, small chip companies eligible for the
    money.
        Senator Moran. You have reassured me of that at least 16
    times, and I am thankful that it is still true today. Would you
    describe, Secretary, the process for evaluating tech hub
    applications and, in particular: What roles do the EDA regional
    offices play in that process?
        Secretary Raimondo. So the EDA, it is, as I said before, it
    is a merit-based process. We have national security goals that
    we need to achieve, and those are primary. Another thing we
    evaluate is likelihood of success, how strong is the
    partnership, is there full buy-in from the community. The
    decisions are going to be made by a committee in D.C., with
    advice and consultation from the local offices.
        Senator Moran. Thank you. Regional offices?
        Secretary Raimondo. Regional offices, yes.
        Senator Moran. Could you tell me, Secretary, if there is
    value in an application for a tech hub that originates by a
    state, the tech hub application originates by a state, as
    compared to an entity, a different entity?
        Secretary Raimondo. I don't think that. There is no
    preference either way.
        Senator Moran. OK.
        Secretary Raimondo. We are open.
        Senator Moran. The timeline for tech hub announcements,
    tech hub designees, and development grant awards.
        Secretary Raimondo. This fall, as soon as possible.
        Senator Moran. Then, expect to see CHIPS Program Awards at
    what point in time?
        Secretary Raimondo. Also this fall. Let me say this, I am
    moving as fast as I can, but it is more important to get it
    right than move fast. And it depends on companies applying and
    having good applications. Having said that, I hope tech hubs
    will be in the coming weeks, and I hope we will have some CHIPS
    funding announcements this fall.
        Senator Moran. Thank you for the explanation. And it is one
    with which I agree. Finally, I want to talk about Huawei,
    export controls on AI technology. Details about what they seem
    to have accomplished, what Huawei chips have--what Huawei has
    seemed to accomplish, the details of that remain unclear.
        Secretary Raimondo. Mm-hmm.
        Senator Moran. We have a particular interest in our
    appropriations process in the Bureau of Industry and Security
    within your Department. There was a significant funding boost
    in Fiscal Year 2022--I am sorry--2023, I want to get to my
    question in the next few seconds that I have. What gaps remain
    in U.S. technology export restrictions that may have allowed a
    targeted company to manufacture an advanced semiconductor?
        Secretary Raimondo. OK. This is a critical thing, and we
    should visit when we have more time. Let me just say, the
    reports about Huawei are incredibly disturbing. And although I
    can't comment on any investigations, I promise you we take
    every credible threat seriously and investigate to the fullest,
    wherever we think there is a credible allegation that a company
    has done an end run around our export controls.
        We need different tools. I am supportive of the GUARD Act,
    which would--and RESTRICT Act, which would codify our ICTS
    authorities. We need that to have a comprehensive approach to
    go after connected apps. We would need resources, additionally,
    to do that. I think we need additional resources around
    enforcement to do exactly what you are talking about.
        And, candidly, we need to--the threat is different today.
    The threat from China in 2023 is different than the Cold War
    threats of decades ago. It is technology, it is AI, it is
    moving fast. And so I would be--I would welcome a broader
    discussion with you around how we modernize what we do, and how
    we properly fund what we do.
        Senator Moran. There have been lots of wake-up calls.
    Huawei is a particular one that stands out, received
    significant attention. And I would welcome the chance for your
    direction, suggestion on how we, either as appropriators or
    authorizers, could be helpful in closing this opportunity for
    China's technology theft.
        Secretary Raimondo. We will do it. I mean, I have to say I
    am proud of the fact that under my watch, we imposed the
    largest fine ever in history, a $300 million fine against a
    company called Seagate for violating export controls, selling
    to Huawei. So we are as tough as we need to be, but more
    resources would be helpful.
        Senator Moran. Was the fine collected?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
        Senator Moran. OK. Good. Thank you.
        The Chair. Senator Lujan.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. BEN RAY LUJAN,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO

        Senator Lujan. Thank you, Chair Cantwell. Thank you to the
    Ranking Member for this important hearing. Secretary, thank you
    for being here. Director, thank you for being here.
        Secretary Raimondo, one thing I wanted to share with you,
    and also Chair Cantwell, is to show support for Ranking Member
    Cruz's question to the Secretary on mid-band spectrum and
    coordination between the Department of Commerce and Defense to
    ensure more mid-band spectrum is available for 5G Wireless.
        So I don't have a question at this time. I only wanted to
    show support for the request from Senator Cruz and the
    commitment from the Secretary to brief Congress on the study
    that the Department of Defense submitted last week. So thank
    you very much for that.
        As you know, I am proud of New Mexico's long history of
    connecting scientific innovation, national security, and global
    competitiveness, and for over 75 years, our Department of
    Energy National Labs have served the Nation with their
    international leadership in scientific discovery and
    innovation. Created through CHIPS and science, the NSF
    Innovation Engines are designed to create regional-scale
    innovation ecosystems across the Nation to accelerate the
    development of critical technologies. These Innovation Engines
    will provide another opportunity for states like New Mexico to
    support the Nation by driving the scientific innovation needed
    to maintain international leadership.
        Director, I was pleased that your testimony acknowledged
    the fact that we all know too well. The economic prosperity
    produced through scientific innovation has not been shared
    equally across our Nation. My question, Director, yes or no, do
    you expect that the choice of Regional Innovation Engines will
    provide economic opportunities to those communities that are
    too often overlooked?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Yes. And I can give you many examples.
        Senator Lujan. I appreciate that very much, and I will
    submit something to get those specific responses as well. I was
    happy to see that one of the 16 Innovation Engine finalists is
    the New Mexico Space Valley Coalition, which is dedicated to
    grow in the Nation's commercial space industry. But the New
    Mexico Space Valley Coalition includes the City of Albuquerque,
    leadership from the private industry, universities across the
    State of New Mexico, including Navajo Technical University.
        Director, as you already know the coalition in New Mexico
    is an incredibly talented group that represents the diversity
    of my state, and the United States of America, by all measures,
    and the New Mexico Space Valley Coalition appears to be a
    perfect fit, for the innovation engine decision. The CHIPS and
    Science Act, established the technology innovation, and
    partnership directed at the National Science Foundation.
        Of those three words, technology, innovation, and
    partnerships, partnership is very important, by expanding
    authorities for not just the National Science Foundation, but
    also the Departments of Energy and Commerce, the CHIPS and
    Science Act makes clear that no single department or agency can
    do it alone. The scientific challenges we face are too big, the
    time line to meet these challenges is too short, and the
    international competition is too strong. I was pleased to see
    that NSF, and the Department of Energy signed an MOU to partner
    on finding solutions to many of these challenges.
        Director, yes or no. For the National Science Foundation to
    successfully implement the new authorities provided by CHIPS
    and Science, will the agency need partners like the Department
    of Energy?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Yes. And we do that in large measure with
    the MOU, and there are many examples again, of that too.
        Senator Lujan. Can you share some of those examples that
    you just shared, through that MOU as well, but others that show
    that connection and the partnership with the Department of
    Energy?
        Dr. Panchanathan. We will be happy to do that, yes.
        Senator Lujan. Now, Secretary Raimondo, thank you for your
    leadership and for leading the Department of Commerce,
    especially in this space where so many of the challenges that
    we face as a country will fall under your leadership and the
    jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce and your team. We
    just heard from the Director how NSF is partnering with the
    Department of Energy. Can you share with the Committee how the
    Department of Commerce is engaging the Department of Energy and
    the National Labs in implementing CHIPS and Science?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes, thank you. We also have an
    excellent cooperation with the Department of Energy, and in
    particular in the National Science and Technology Center, which
    will stand up this fall. They, along with NSF, will be one of
    the founding entities, and so they will have a real role to
    play in establishing the center, defining the priorities, and
    you know, we plan to rely on their expertise very heavily.
        Senator Lujan. I appreciate that very much. And, Madam
    Chair, as I yield back, I just want to note for the record a
    concern that I have, which is looking at the aggressive posture
    from the administration, solely for the National Science
    Foundation top line. I have a concern when I am looking at the
    top lines for NSF compared to the Department of Energy Office
    of Science. And I think that Congress and the administration
    need to expand funding for both NSF and the Office of Science
    at similar rates if we are going to work to make sure CHIPS
    truly succeeds as well. So with that, thank you, and I yield
    back.
        The Chair. Thank you, Senator Thune.

                     STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE,
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA

        Senator Thune. Thank you, Madam Chair. Secretary Raimondo,
    I thank you for being here today. I have been working with
    members of this committee on both sides of the aisle to develop
    a Light-Touch Framework for oversight of artificial
    intelligence. And as I am sure you are aware, AI is a major
    focus for the Senate.
        In your written testimony, you indicated that the CHIPS and
    Science Act will help enable us to be the global leader in
    emerging technologies, and you specifically referenced the new
    National Semiconductor Technology Center. I am focused on
    ensuring that the Senate puts the necessary guardrails in place
    while also ensuring that any legislation encourages and not
    stifles innovation in AI.
        So could you explain in more detail how the National
    Semiconductor Technology Center, and the CHIPS and Science Act,
    more broadly, is encouraging innovation in artificial
    intelligence?
        Secretary Raimondo. Thank you. I agree with you strongly.
    The United States has a competitive edge in the world right
    now. We are leading the world in AI, and we need to preserve
    that lead and extend that lead, and so we have to preserve our
    competitive edge; having said that, we have to balance the
    opportunity with guardrails that make sure that we protect
    ourselves from the downsides.
        So NIST, part of the Department of Commerce, has put out a
    Risk Management Framework, which is voluntary, to developers
    for safeguards they should use as they develop new AI
    algorithms, similar to the voluntary commitments that the
    President and the administration have extracted from the
    biggest AI developers.
        With respect to the NSTC, that will be research and
    development. So whether it is new materials, new ways to
    develop new semiconductor chips, right, all AI is going to be
    powered by AI chips, where, again, we lead the world. I think
    the NSTC will have collaborations with universities and
    companies to lead the next wave of research and development and
    startups, so we continue to maintain our AI lead.
        Senator Thune. Thanks. This Administration continues to
    push for public utility-style regulations on the internet. USDA
    has tried to insert so-called ``net neutrality rules'' in its
    reconnect program, NTIA, has thrown in a number of extraneous
    requirements in the BEAD Program. And just last week, the FCC
    announced that it will be reinstating the Obama-era Title II
    Regulations on the internet. Don't ask me why you would want to
    regulate the Internet as a depression-era monopoly, but they
    seem to be headed back down that road.
        With respect to the BEAD Program, I find it troubling that
    the administration would put over $40 billion in broadband
    funding at risk just to accomplish a campaign talking point.
    And what I would argue is that instead, we should be
    establishing efficient BEAD rules that incentivize the
    participation of companies that have spent years building out
    reliable networks to some of the most remote parts of the
    country.
        Will you commit to not require states to include specific
    price points for broadband offerings in their BEAD plans; yes
    or no?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes. We do not require that. I want to
    be clear. We are not rate-regulating. We are not price-setting.
    And we are not requiring states to do that. Furthermore, we
    want all providers, large and small, to participate in the
    program. The way we are doing it is every state, you know, your
    state, your Governor, would create a plan that they think could
    meet the needs of your state. And then our job would be to
    evaluate that before we fund the plan.
        Senator Thune. All right, so you would commit that NTIA
    will give states discretion on how to implement----
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
        Senator Thune.--their low-cost and middle-class
    affordability requirements? In 2022 I introduced the Quantum
    Network Infrastructure and Workforce Development Act with
    Senator Hassan, which was ultimately enacted as part of the
    CHIPS and Science Act. And among other things, the bill asks to
    build on the expertise of NIST to improve existing research on
    quantum networking and encryption. These applications have the
    potential to greatly enhance network security and protect
    privacy while bolstering U.S. leadership and competitiveness in
    the development of these technologies.
        Could you describe how the Department has worked to promote
    U.S. competitiveness and innovation in the development and
    standardization of quantum technologies, including through the
    implementation of this bill?
        Secretary Raimondo. I would be happy to, and I will follow
    up with Dr. Locascio, who runs NIST. But I can tell you that
    quantum as--quantum, AI, and chips are areas where we are
    exceedingly focused to develop standards, and to focus our
    investments.
        Senator Thune. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Madam
    Chair.
        The Chair. Thank you. Senator Peters.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN

        Senator Peters. Thank you, Madam Chair. And to our
    witnesses, welcome, it is good to see both of you here. And
    thank you for all the great work that you do.
        Secretary Raimondo, I believe, in order to be a great
    country that you actually have to make things. And it has to be
    our focus. You and I have talked about that before. And one of
    the primary goals of the CHIPS and Science Act was to increase
    domestic production of mature semiconductor chips to address
    the crisis that we saw in the automotive supply chain. A crisis
    that was preventing consumers from being able to purchase
    vehicles and resulted in furloughs of auto workers due to the
    shortage of mature chips; like we had parking lots full of
    automobiles, and pickup trucks, and other vehicles that just
    needed a chip or two before they could head off to the dealer.
        Your Department has pledged to spend $10 billion in the
    CHIPS funding to fix that, and certainly, I would love to have
    an update on that, but hope that your commitment will stand
    through the full expenditure of that necessary investment in
    that industry. But in addition to making more mature chips here
    in America, we must also use the CHIPS and Science Act to
    invest in the future of the automotive industry, and that means
    research and development.
        Michigan stakeholders have already mobilized to meet that
    challenge, and one example is the STAR Initiative to establish
    a Semiconductor Center of Excellence in Michigan, led by the
    internationally renowned research center, IMEC, semiconductor
    equipment manufacturer KLA, the University of Michigan, and
    Washington Community College.
        The STAR Initiative will focus on advanced microelectronic
    research for vehicle electrification, and autonomous automotive
    solutions. These innovative solutions will help cement the
    United States' leadership, not only in the future of
    semiconductors, but also in the future of the automotive
    industry.
        So my question for you, Secretary Raimondo, as you
    disseminate CHIPS R&D funding in the coming months, will you
    commit to considering the crossover impacts that semiconductor
    R&D projects can have on other industries, like the automotive
    industry, as a way to maximize the impact of these funds?
        Secretary Raimondo. I will. But let me say this. As you
    know, the statute--as you well know, the statute requires a $2
    billion set aside for the mature node chips, and we have said
    that we believe we will invest closer to $10 billion in supply
    chains, mature and current node chips, and that is still our
    plan. So we think that is what is necessary to get the job
    done.
        With respect to your other question, early in the new year,
    we will be getting the NOFO out, the Funding Opportunity out
    for the R&D portion, and I will commit, certainly, to work with
    you between now and then as we design that application before
    putting it out early in the new year. But I do want to be
    clear, and I have said this all along, the point of the CHIPS
    Program isn't just to incentivize a few new fabs and call it a
    day, right. That is not enough. That is not success. That is
    necessary but insufficient.
        The point is to do exactly as you say. It is to stimulate
    research and development, it is to stimulate job training, and
    to have a whole ecosystem that no longer--that we need to
    deepen in the United States, including applications like in the
    auto industry. So we are in violent agreement on this, and you
    know I look forward to working with you.
        Senator Peters. Very good. Well, I will look forward to
    that as well. I will raise another issue related to
    semiconductors, and that is advanced packaging, which is a
    significant part of the chip supply chain, as you well know,
    that I believe needs significant focus as part of our onshoring
    efforts, to bring this back to the United States, because of
    its importance both from a national security perspective and
    for American workers and consumers.
        Calumet Electronics in Calumet, Michigan, with the help of
    incredible engineers from the Michigan Technological University
    up in Houghton, is doing incredible work on advanced packaging,
    particularly by making very advanced printed circuit boards for
    defense applications, and they are expanding their capacity.
        My question for you is, as we try to ensure the supply
    chain is supported, can you speak to how advanced packaging
    will be prioritized in funding going forward?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes. This fall we will be putting out a
    strategy paper on our packaging strategy, our plan, so you will
    be able to see that soon. But let me tell you this, right now,
    we don't really do advanced packaging in the United States. It
    is a huge problem that doesn't get much attention. Even if we
    make the chips in the United States and then ship them to Asia
    to be packaged, that doesn't secure, you know, doesn't align
    with our national security goals.
        So we are deeply committed, at the end of this
    implementation, to have advanced packaging on our shores. And,
    as I say, later this year, we will put out more details on the
    strategy.
        The Chair. Senator Blackburn.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE

        Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Madame Chairman. Let me stay
    with this issue on the fabs, and I had looked at your Notice of
    Funding Opportunity when you were talking about we could have
    as many fabs as we want, and how we have to move forward on
    this with the supply chain. So my question for you is, looking
    at the Investment Tax Credit, and should Congress look at
    harmonizing the Investment Tax Credit in 48D to align with the
    program that you are running to ensure that the law allows for
    manufacturing for the facilities that you claim are going to be
    necessary, and for being able to reshore much of that activity?
    And then how are you working with Secretary Yellen on this?
        Secretary Raimondo. So you know, I will leave it to
    Congress to decide if and how you might want to amend the
    legislation. The legislation, as currently crafted, has the tax
    credit being more restrictive than the CHIPS Act--excuse me--
    than the grant, so it is intended by statute, that the tax
    credit is more restrictive than the grant program.
        Senator Blackburn. Yes, my question is, should we harmonize
    that?
        Secretary Raimondo. I would have to think about that, to be
    very honest.
        Senator Blackburn. OK. If you want to get back to me on
    that, I think your insight on this is something that is
    important.
        Secretary Raimondo. OK.
        Senator Blackburn. Dr. Panch, again, we almost got you into
    a UT jersey when you were there in Tennessee, and we will get
    you back. Let us talk a little bit about microelectronics and
    ultraviolet lithography, and the work that is being done there.
    What are you doing to make certain that we don't have several
    different agencies that are working on this, but we are not
    harmonizing that work?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Senator, it was great to be with you at
    the University of Tennessee in Knoxville, where we announced
    the Regional Innovation Engine, which I keep talking about.
    This was focused on transportation electrification and
    digitization. And specifically to your question, we have very
    tight partnerships with all of the agencies in topical areas
    that bring us together. For example, we have an MOU with the
    Department of----
        Senator Blackburn. So you are watching the duplication?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Absolutely. Absolutely.
        Senator Blackburn. Perfect. That is what I wanted to hear.
    And I know people in Tennessee wanted to know that.
        Secretary, I want to talk a little bit about your trip to
    China. Did you think it was a success?
        Secretary Raimondo. It was a productive trip, certainly.
        Senator Blackburn. Were you able to hold them to account?
        Secretary Raimondo. I was clear that there will be no
    negotiation on anything related to national security or export
    controls.
        Senator Blackburn. And did you call them out about
    committing genocide against the Uyghur Muslims?
        Secretary Raimondo. I did.
        Senator Blackburn. And their response?
        Secretary Raimondo. I didn't get much of a response.
        Senator Blackburn. OK. And have you visited Taiwan?
        Secretary Raimondo. I have not.
        Senator Blackburn. Any reason for that?
        Secretary Raimondo. I have had no reason to visit Taiwan.
        Senator Blackburn. No reason to visit Taiwan? And even
    though they are a primary supplier of a lot of chips? Do you
    consider Taiwan a country?
        Secretary Raimondo. The administration's policy is clear on
    Taiwan, and----
        Senator Blackburn. So you are not going to deviate from
    that?
        Secretary Raimondo. Absolutely not.
        Senator Blackburn. OK. All right. I think that we are all
    very concerned about continuing to bolster our leadership,
    whether it is going to deal with semiconductors, broadband, AI,
    quantum, the microelectronics that we were just discussing. And
    we cannot afford to fall behind the CCP. We just can't. And it
    is going to take calling them out on this and holding them to
    account.
        And, in my opinion, it is going to take supporting Taiwan
    and the work that they are doing. And, of course, you know, we
    have got to make certain that the CCP-controlled entities don't
    benefit as we move forward implementing CHIPS. And I think it
    is also Madam Chairman, one of the reasons that we have got to
    get busy with the NQIA and make certain that we get that
    reauthorized this year.
        And I had read the article in The Hill where they mentioned
    that quantum computing capabilities are things that the Chinese
    Communist Party is going to use to bolster their surveillance
    and their satellite movements. And as you look at this, it is
    imperative that we not give them one inch. And I think that
    sending that message that, yes, indeed, Taiwan is someone we
    can work with, and they want to have our business is something
    that is important.
        Thank you, Madam Chair.
        The Chair. Thank you. Senator Welch. And I will just ask
    members we----

                    STATEMENT OF HON. PETER WELCH,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM VERMONT

        Senator Welch. First of all----
        The Chair.--we are on a tight time frame with some--with
    our witnesses, and we want to get through everybody, so just
    keep to your time if you can.
        Senator Welch. And I will. Secretary Raimondo, first of
    all, I think you are doing a great job, and we are excited in
    Vermont about the CHIPS Act, and I thank my colleague, Todd
    Young, who played such an instrumental role in getting that
    passed. We have real production of gallium nitride chips,
    printed on silicon chips, and that is a new technology that is
    providing greater power.
        GlobalFoundries, which is a very large company in Vermont
    is a leader in this. And I want to give you an opportunity to
    explain what the Department is doing to continue to incentivize
    the development and the manufacture of mature legacy node
    semiconductor technology?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes, thank you, Senator; nice to see
    you. As I said, we--the statute requires that we invest at
    least $2 billion in grants in legacy nodes. We believe that we
    will invest significantly more than that because these are the
    CHIPS that are essential. I will say we have also executed an
    MOU with the Department of Defense, whereby they can share
    information with us around their needs for the defense
    industrial base. Much, if not most of the defense industrial
    base needs these existing node, mature node, and legacy chips.
    So that is another reason why we are so focused on making sure
    we have enough supply in the United States.
        Senator Welch. Thank you. Another question of real interest
    to us in Vermont, the Regional Tech Hubs Program that, of
    course, as you know was part of CHIPS and Science. We have got
    applicants. And is there a commitment from the EDA and the
    Department of Commerce to follow the requirements in that
    program around rural and EPSCoR states, and that Vermont would
    be among them?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes, of course.
        Senator Welch. And the deadline for Phase I solicitations
    was August 15, and there is a lot of interest in knowing when
    we are going to hear. And I don't know if you can comment on
    that, but it would be good to have some visibility on when we
    can expect an answer.
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes, Senator. As I said earlier, we are
    working as fast as we can. We have received over 400
    applications from nearly every state. I hope to be able to have
    news in the next month, or so.
        Senator Welch. OK. Thank you very much.
        And I wanted to ask Dr. Panchanathan a few questions. We
    really appreciate all that the Act is doing, and you are doing
    to help clean energy innovators from the development stage all
    the way through commercialization. And all of us are a little
    bit blue about how we developed solar but then we lost
    commercialization to China. So I want to give you an
    opportunity to express what you are doing to ensure that the
    Directorate of Technology is bringing clean energy technologies
    from the research phase to the commercialization phase in the
    U.S.?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you very much, Senator Welch, for
    the opportunity to weigh in on this. In May of this year, we
    announced the first-ever NSF Engines Development Awards, which
    I talked about, seven of those awards include sustainable
    energy as a topic area. In August, we announced 16 NSF Engine
    finalist proposals. Two of those include the topic areas of
    sustainable energy.
        In addition, to that, many of our existing programs that in
    the translation phase, in terms of what you refer to as
    starting--resulting in startups or small companies being
    invested in, SBIR and STTR programs have also got significant
    clean energy portfolios as well.
        So as an example, the Vermont startup, Rich Earth, LLC, is
    aiming to leverage clean energy technologies while in the
    process of optimizing wastewater treatment for nutrient and
    water recovery, so TIP has also launched the Accelerating
    Research Translation Program, so there is a number of those
    activities that is focused on clean energy and sustainable
    energy. So I hope that answers your question.
        Senator Welch. OK. Thank you. I want to stay within the
    Chair's concern. And I just want to make a comment about
    working with us on the letter of credit that is going to hammer
    us if it stays at its current level in the BEAD Program.
        Madam Chair, I yield back.
        The Chair. Thank you. Senator Vance.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. J. D. VANCE,
                         U.S. SENATOR FROM OHIO

        Senator Vance. Thanks, Madam Chair. Thanks, Secretary
    Raimondo, and the witness for being here. I appreciate it. I
    want to say or at least echo some of the comments that
    colleagues from across the aisle have made of my colleague
    Senator Young, and some of the great works done on the CHIPS
    Act. I, of course, wasn't here when the CHIPS Act was passed,
    but I certainly would have supported it because I think it is
    important to bring American manufacturing, especially in high-
    technology industries, back to our country.
        There have been many stories and many questions raised
    since the CHIPS Act was passed, about its implementation and
    also how companies are benefiting or not from some of its
    resources. I want to focus on one particular barrier, just to
    start out with, Secretary Raimondo, which is the labor
    shortage. You hear a lot from folks who are working in the chip
    industry that we have a labor shortage. You hear this, of
    course, from Taiwan Semiconductor, which has tried to build a
    $40 billion facility in Arizona and is effectively trying to
    import skilled engineers from Taiwan because they say they
    can't get the labor from here.
        Is that an accurate assessment of the situation, that we
    have, of course, the need to produce chips in America, but we
    also have a shortage of skilled labor, and recruiting the
    people to actually make those chips?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes, it is. Listen, I think, and as we
    have said, we will be using some of the CHIPS Act to devote to
    labor and training and workforce. And in fact, since the
    passage of the bill, over 50 community colleges have started
    new initiatives to train people. But there is no question, we
    think we will create about a half a million jobs, at least,
    through the implementation, and we need to do more to train
    people for that.
        Senator Vance. So being mindful of time, Secretary
    Raimondo.
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes, sorry.
        Senator Vance. I want to point to a particular set of
    implementation criteria that, in light of the admitted labor
    shortage, gives me some concern. So one of the administrative
    directives says that applicants to CHIPS funding must, quote,
    ``Develop an equity strategy in concert with their partners to
    create equitable workforce pathways for economically
    disadvantaged individuals in their region''; additionally,
    applicants must recruit from diverse sources of talent and,
    quote, ``Set and publicly communicate goals for workplace
    diversity.''
        Now, I note, of course, that creating these diversity
    mandates within a company actually requires additional costs.
    You have to hire diversity consultants. You have to hire
    additional human resources people. And so I guess I am
    struggling to make sense of the fact that we apparently have a
    shortage of skilled labor to manufacture chips on the one hand,
    and yet the Secretary of Commerce is telling people that they
    can only hire the people who check the right diversity boxes.
    That doesn't make a ton of sense, and it seems to be
    counterproductive to the goal of bringing this industry back to
    the United States in the first place.
        Secretary Raimondo. So first of all, there are no mandates.
    Second of all, is it completely consistent----
        Senator Vance. What would you call it, Secretary with--
    Secretary Raimondo, when the Secretary of Commerce says: You
    must do this in order to receive funding; if it is not a
    mandate, what is it?
        Secretary Raimondo. What is it that we are telling them
    they have to show us a workforce plan, and we need to evaluate
    that plan.
        Senator Vance. They have to show us a workforce plan in
    order to receive money from the Federal Government----
        Secretary Raimondo. Absolutely.
        Senator Vance.--and that is the definition of a mandate.
    You must do X in order to receive Y dollars.
        Secretary Raimondo. The mandate is----
        Senator Vance. Let me make this point, Secretary Raimondo;
    look, think about this from the perspective of a company that
    is thinking about locating a chip fabrication facility in this
    country or in China. From China, they get cheap labor, massive
    subsidies, and a government that seems to want to work with
    them. From the United States, they get a little bit of money
    and a human resources statement that looks like it was written
    by a 22-year-old gender studies graduate of Harvard or Yale,
    which, let us be honest, it probably was written by a 22-year-
    old gender studies graduate of Harvard or Yale.
        Why would you locate your facility in the United States of
    America when you get a human resources lecture from us, but
    from China, you get a whole lot of money and a whole lot of
    facilitation for your business? What is the market economy
    here? Is it the economy that makes it hard to do business or
    easier to do business? I am curious. Where would you locate the
    facility given those two separate sets of criteria?
        Secretary Raimondo. Sir, before I went to China, I talked
    to about 120 CEOs of U.S. businesses, and they all told me that
    China is becoming increasingly uninvestable. I think there is
    no doubt that I would locate my business in the United States.
        Senator Vance. I agree with you, and I agree these
    companies should locate their business in the United States.
    But we have to be careful. The reason that China has become
    uninvestable is because it is very, very hard to get our money
    out. But if we make it harder to do business, and if we pass
    bipartisan legislation that puts money into American
    manufacturing and then we make it harder to access it unless
    you check the diversity box, we are going to be extremely
    counterproductive.
        I am mindful that I am at the end of my time. The last
    point that I would make, Secretary Raimondo, the United States,
    thank God, does not have a Chief Diversity Officer. I would
    appreciate it if the Biden Administration didn't pretend to be
    one. Thank you.
        Secretary Raimondo. My job is to protect taxpayer money,
    and in order to do that, these companies have to be able to
    meet their mission, and in order to do that, they need to have
    a trained workforce, and I am going to work with them to make
    sure that happens.
        Senator Vance. I don't think diversity mandates are part of
    that.
        The Chair. Senator Rosen.
        Senator Vance. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
        The Chair. Senator Rosen.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. JACKY ROSEN,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA

        Senator Rosen. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate it. And
    thank you for holding this important hearing. And Secretary
    Raimondo, Director Panchanathan, thank you for your testimony
    today. I really appreciate it.
        I want to take a moment to recognize the work that
    Secretary Raimondo, and Director Panchanathan have done to
    implement the CHIPS and Science Act. You have half built a team
    that has gone above and beyond, to quickly and efficiently roll
    out these programs so that we can strengthen our STEM workforce
    and bring good-paying jobs right here at home. To everyone's
    point, that is what we want.
        And so we have talked a lot about advanced manufacturing,
    of course, we passed the CHIPS and Science Act, we have all
    been talking about this. We want to bring manufacturing back to
    America. We want to create those good-paying jobs here. And as
    we do this, again, everyone is talking about creating the
    workforce with the training and skills that are necessary. I am
    proud to support that bill, and I am proud that it included
    language that I drafted with Senator Blackburn to provide
    funding, workforce education, training, and development in
    advanced manufacturing. And this provision was based on my
    bipartisan Advanced Manufacturing Jobs in America Act.
        So Director, can you please provide us an update on the
    implementation of the workforce provision?
        And then, Secretary Raimondo, can you talk a little bit
    after that about how we include our smaller communities and our
    rural communities in being sure that they can grow in advanced
    manufacturing?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you very much, Senator. Again, I
    want to say it was a pleasure being in Reno, Nevada, announcing
    the Regional Innovation Engine there. And I will come to that
    in a moment. To answer your question, NSF received $200 million
    over 5 years to establish workforce development plans focused
    on microelectronics. But as you know, NSF is the STEM workforce
    development agency for the country in all aspects of science,
    technology, engineering, and mathematics, in terms of the
    broad-based mandate which focuses on K-12, as well as
    university, community colleges, and beyond.
        So this $25 million investment in Fiscal Year 2023 and
    Fiscal Year 2024 is focused on bringing up, as I said earlier,
    training upwards of 100,000 new semiconductor researchers,
    practitioners, technicians, and educators, fulfilling a key
    need of the semiconductor industry through Fiscal Year 2027 and
    beyond. So our funds have been used, primarily, in the
    partnerships that we have had with Intel and Micron to scale
    it, as well as the future of semiconductors program, as well as
    computer science for U.S. program, and specifically focused on
    microelectronic and semiconductor workforce development.
        I am happy to talk more about this. In the interest of
    time, I just want to make sure that I am respectful of the
    overall time constraints that the Chair talked about. But I am
    happy to say that in Reno, Nevada, we are involving the Truckee
    Meadows Community College in training the talent toward lithium
    mining, processing, as well as recycling. Thank you.
        Senator Rosen. That is great. I have a lot to talk about
    there, and we love our community colleges in Nevada.
        Secretary Raimondo. Nice to see you, Senator. Just to
    briefly add on to what Panch said. Last Friday, we put out an
    additional funding application for small suppliers.
    Additionally, as I have said earlier today, we are committed to
    investing in or providing grants to small, medium, and large
    semiconductor companies. In fact, as we have talked about, the
    United States lost about 25 percent of its small manufacturers
    in the past 25 years. Many of them are specialty chemical
    companies or material companies. And so, we are very much
    interested to partner with these companies in the CHIPS program
    to build out the entire supply chain all over the United
    States.
        Senator Rosen. Well, Secretary Raimondo, I am going to
    just--I know I have a minute left, so I am going to be very
    quick. I want to build on this, in the rural areas and in the
    mining areas that Director talked about too. I am a member of
    the Senate Armed Services Committee. We are thinking a lot
    about the national security implications of our critical
    mineral supply chains. This state's minerals are in the ground
    in rural Nevada. It is really important, we are the Nation's
    leader in hard rock mining and battery recycling, and so,
    talking about our workforce, talking about all the things we
    can do, what more can Congress do to bolster our critical
    minerals workforce, strengthen our supply chain, and of course,
    for us, that is really going to help our small and rural
    communities in Nevada?
        Secretary Raimondo. I think we need to continue to focus on
    it. We need a comprehensive national plan as it relates to
    critical minerals, which is essential for electric vehicles and
    semiconductors. We, at the Commerce Department, are trying to
    build and have asked for, I think, $20 million to set up a
    supply chain office in the Commerce Department so we can be
    proactive, not just reactive, in identifying all of our holes.
        Senator Rosen. Well, thank you. I look forward to working
    on that.
        Madam Chair, I made it with just right about on time. Thank
    you so much.
        The Chair. Thank you. Senator Schmitt.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. ERIC SCHMITT,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSOURI

        Senator Schmitt. Thank you, Madam Chair. Welcome. Good to
    see you. I want to get to just two or three topics, so I will
    go kind of quickly. But as you know, the DoD is in the process
    of evaluating commercial 5G use, and Madam Secretary, in use in
    the lower 3. It is my understanding they have issued a report,
    they have talked to you about it, they have shared it with you,
    and also the NTIA, and there is a lot of hesitancy, I think,
    for a variety of reasons from other agencies--for a variety of
    reasons, of making additional spectrum available for commercial
    use.
        It is finite. So I think the collaboration is really
    important, and you play an important role in advising the
    President on this, as you know, and understanding what our
    Nation's Spectrum Strategy ought to be, and what additional
    Federal spectrum available for commercial use, whether it is
    licensed shared, licensed, or unlicensed, what that ought to
    be. So it is critical, I think, that you know, I serve on the
    Armed Services Committee, too, in addition to this committee,
    so there is a balancing act here, right? Not just national
    security, but obviously economic security. What are you doing,
    specifically, to have or evaluate a strategy here, and what
    would you do tomorrow if DoD says the lower 3 are off limits
    entirely?
        Secretary Raimondo. I think that would be deeply
    problematic. As we said earlier, we received the report at the
    end of last week, and we should arrange a briefing for the DoD
    and NTIA to come to provide that briefing on what their report
    said. It is a balance, but economic competitiveness is national
    security, and making sure we have enough spectrum available for
    private sector innovation and 5G expansion is national
    security.
        And there are ways, if we are innovative, this shouldn't be
    a zero-sum game. We can make more spectrum available, and also
    not take anything away from the DoD that they need to fulfill
    their mission.
        Senator Schmitt. Madam Secretary, in August, you visited
    China, shortly after it was revealed that the PRC had hacked
    your e-mail account. And they were privy to all of your e-
    mails. In an interview with CNN State of the Union, you argued
    that you were firm and direct about the hack with the Chinese
    counterparts. Do you think they viewed your visit as a sign of
    weakness?
        Secretary Raimondo. I do not.
        Senator Schmitt. OK. Are you aware of additional Cabinet
    members that you were e-mailing with that they were able to
    access your e-mails from?
        Secretary Raimondo. As you know, Senator, this is an active
    investigation, so I don't want to go into that in this public
    forum.
        Senator Schmitt. Obviously, this is concerning, right?
        Secretary Raimondo. No doubt. The hack was concerning, it
    was unacceptable. I brought it up when I was there. It is more
    than concerning.
        Senator Schmitt. OK. I just want to switch things up a
    little bit with the remaining time that I have. As it relates
    to the BEAD Program, Senator Vance asked a couple of questions
    in this regard. What does climate change have to do with
    broadband?
        Secretary Raimondo. Climate change has to do with
    everything. Tell me your exact question.
        Senator Schmitt. Well, I will be happy to. You ask, you
    have climate change requirements, and that the NOFO states:
    Eligible entities must account not only for current climate-
    related risks but also for how the frequency, severity, and
    nature of these extreme events may plausibly evolve as our
    climate continues to change over the coming decades.
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
        Senator Schmitt. Can you tell me anywhere, anywhere though,
    Madam Secretary, anywhere, where Congress has put into law that
    you would require them to mitigate climate change? Can you
    point to that section?
        Secretary Raimondo. Congress requires us to be good
    stewards of the taxpayer money and to be accountable----
        Senator Schmitt. That is not my question. Where are you
    drawing the authority from?
        Secretary Raimondo [continuing]. And therefore we have to
    fund projects that will be successful; otherwise, we will waste
    money.
        Senator Schmitt. So I understand you might think it is
    important. I understand Joe Biden might think it is important.
    But Congress hasn't actually said that is a requirement.
        Secretary Raimondo. But you want us to fund projects that
    will be successful, and if climate events prevent success for--
    --
        Senator Schmitt. How does deploying broadband in Branson,
    Missouri, have anything to do with your climate agenda?
        Secretary Raimondo. I will give you a great--well, no, but
    for example, Senator, I talk to people all the time, including
    in rural places, who tell me that due to climate events, their
    current technology doesn't work, like they don't have the
    Internet when there is a storm. So climate very definitely
    affects the effectiveness of certain technologies that provide
    the Internet to people.
        Senator Schmitt. OK. I can tell you--yes, I can tell you,
    having just been elected by a state with a large rural
    population; they are interested in their kids being able to
    access the Internet for homework. OK.
        Secretary Raimondo. And that is the point that----
        Senator Schmitt. They are not interested in your social
    experiments, OK? So just in the line of Senator Vance's
    question about, you know; injecting identity politics into your
    applications, respectfully, how about we just deploy the
    broadband so people can access the internet?
        Secretary Raimondo. Well, your state will receive $1.7
    billion, and your Governor will be providing us with a plan for
    how he feels it should be invested.
        The Chair. Senator Markey.
        Senator Schmitt. Thank you.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS

        Senator Markey. Thank you. And you have two of my all-time
    favorite witnesses is here, so good to see you, Madam
    Secretary, and Panch. You know, you know you are somebody when
    you are a one-name wonder, like Beyonce, or Cher, or Bono.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Markey. So with the explosive growth over the past
    two decades, the semiconductor industry is a large contributor
    to the climate crisis, releasing the equivalent annual
    emissions of 1.4 million cars on the roads of the United
    States. Carbon emissions and water consumption are particularly
    intense for the production of the most advanced CHIPS. As the
    Commerce Department prepares to issue $50 billion for chip
    manufacturing in R&D, we cannot ignore the environmental impact
    of this investment.
        Secretary Raimondo, I was pleased to see that the
    Department of Commerce is requiring chip companies to submit
    climate and environmental responsibility plans in their
    applications for the CHIPS Act funds. So Madam Secretary, I
    understand that you are committing to ensuring that companies
    make good on their environmental commitments. Is that right?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes, and it isn't social policy. It is
    good business. Every CEO of every American company will tell
    you they have to manage risk, and there is risk associated with
    climate events, and if we don't plan for those climate events,
    then they can insert risk into these projects, whether it is
    broadband or chips. So this is--companies ought to design
    projects to minimize adverse impacts to the project from
    climate and the environment. This is just good business and
    good taxpayer protection. It has nothing to do with the social
    agenda.
        Senator Markey. Oh. Great. So major manufacturing
    activities, including chips manufacturing can also lead to
    significant environmental justice concerns for communities
    surrounding the manufacturing plants. Developing chips is an
    incredibly water, energy, and chemically intensive process. The
    chemicals currently used in semiconductor fabrication are
    extremely dangerous to workers, community members, and their
    families.
        New technologies and processes are needed to manufacture
    semiconductors without these risks. So can you tell us how you
    are prioritizing that research so that it is truly green and
    clean in the semiconductor fabrication technologies?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes. So in addition to companies who
    are applying for taxpayer money, they have to show us a
    financial plan, an R&D plan, a security plan, and we want to
    see a sustainability plan that we can evaluate to make sure
    that they are serious about these commitments.
        Senator Markey. Yes. So we are going to open the Federal
    taxpayers' wallets to private sector companies, but we can't do
    so and close our eyes to the potential environmental harm to
    the communities where they are going to be located. We can do
    both at the same time.
        Now, I want to move to the environmental impact of chip
    manufacturer to the impact of chip use. So big data, machine
    learning, and AI all require huge numbers of chip cutting-edge
    semiconductors and create a significant environmental impact. A
    study from the University of Massachusetts Amherst estimated
    that the energy for developing one advanced AI algorithm out of
    millions of potential models of algorithms would emit as much
    CO2 as five cars over the algorithm's lifetime, and
    that could be millions of algorithms that are out there.
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
        Senator Markey. So these data centers are using scarce
    water supplies across our country for cooling these chips. And
    while AI proponents argue that AI will solve most of our
    pressing problems, the energy required to power this technology
    is contributing to the biggest problem of them all, climate
    change. So can you talk about how you are integrating your
    thinking at Commerce on these issues as one solution to a set
    of problems could actually exacerbate another even larger set
    of problems?
        Secretary Raimondo. It is such an excellent question, and
    as you think about AI, and the compute power that is going to
    be required for training these large models, it is much greater
    than any of us thought. One area of innovation in chips is
    making chips that consume less energy. And so the research and
    development money that we will spend, the NSTC, I suspect much
    of it will go to exactly this innovation, which is to say high-
    compute chips that are much more energy efficient because
    that--otherwise this won't be sustainable. If you think what we
    need to do--match up what we need to do for sustainability with
    the amount of compute power, we need to have new innovations.
        Senator Markey. And I wish my mother could hear a Rhodes
    Scholar tell me that I asked a good question. I wish you could
    hear that, Ma.
        And just finally on the labor front, the good jobs that we
    are trying to create so that these families can thrive, have
    good wages, health care benefits, and the Commerce Department
    is going to be providing billions to these companies. And my
    feeling is they should be required to maintain strong labor
    standards for their workers, and non-union companies must
    provide workers a free and fair chance to join a union, and
    then bargain a good rate. Is that going to be the goal?
        Secretary Raimondo. We agree.
        The Chair. Senator Young.
        Senator Markey. Thank you.

                     STATEMENT OF HON. TODD YOUNG,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA

        Senator Young. Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Secretary,
    good to have you here. Dr. Panch, thank you. It is really
    important that my colleagues have an opportunity to ask these
    probing questions as it pertains to Implementation of CHIPS and
    Science to make sure it is implemented consistent with
    Congressional will and that we have effective administration.
    So thank you for being here.
        In your testimony, Madam Secretary, you highlight the
    importance of being a good steward of taxpayer dollars. Can you
    tell the Committee, in summary fashion, how you have worked
    hard to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars as it pertains to
    implementation of CHIPS and Science? And then advise members
    who may be listening, because they ask me, how they can track,
    on an ongoing basis, implementation of CHIPS and Science
    dollars, in these investments?
        Secretary Raimondo. OK. So as I said earlier, we have built
    a team of over 100 people to analyze each of these
    applications. Every company, in order to receive money, has to
    show us a financial plan, has to show us their books of their
    company, their research and development plan, their national
    security plan, their workforce plan. And as you said earlier,
    this has nothing to do with social policy.
        This is ensuring that these companies can get the job done.
    You don't want--I don't want my taxpayer money given to a
    company that doesn't have a workforce plan and therefore can't
    get the job done, so all of those requirements are designed to
    do that. Furthermore, once we give the grant or structure the
    grant, there will be like an agreement, a contract, a
    compliance agreement. They are going to receive the money
    contingent upon them doing certain things, and we will tranche
    the money out on the basis of those milestones.
        Senator Young. Thank you. I have had some visibility into
    this process from the beginning, and worked with you and
    members of your team who are implementing, and I know that you
    have hired on incredible talent, people with Wall Street
    experience, people who understand how much is needed for each
    of the stakeholders, and therefore much of your work is focused
    on making sure we don't overspend so that we have more
    resources to spend more effectively, and can advance national
    and economic security.
        With respect to the Tech Hub Program, part of CHIPS and
    Science, the Regional Tech and Innovation Hub Program, you have
    spoken to this already, Madam Secretary. State of Indiana, we
    have submitted an application called Heartland BioWorks, and if
    designated, this would help cement Indiana's position as a very
    important locus of biotech, medtech, genomics, and synthetic
    biology innovation.
        Secretary, Congress has only appropriated a portion of the
    Tech Hubs Program funding. What opportunities are we missing,
    especially in regards to leveraging private sector investment,
    by not prioritizing full funding of this program?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes. First, I want to thank you because
    you were a warrior to make sure this, the $500 million was in
    there. It is authorized at $10 billion, so we are missing
    massive opportunities. We have 400 applications from over 40
    states, and we will only be able to make maybe five or six
    sizable grants. As I said earlier, we will designate say 20
    tech hubs, plus or minus, and every one of them is probably
    worthy of maybe a $100 million. That right there is $2 billion.
        So I think every bit of the $10 billion we could put to
    work to stimulate high-quality tech hubs. Your application is
    amazing, but then again, so are many of the others, and we will
    be really missing out.
        Senator Young. Sure. Dr. Panch, relatively, Senator
    Heinrich and I recently introduced the CREATE AI Act to
    establish the National Artificial Intelligence Research
    Resource to serve as a testbed for the development of
    artificial intelligence, and to help us harness the tech's
    amazing potential. Are you supportive of this CREATE AI Act;
    yes or no, sir?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Strongly supportive, yes, yes.
        Senator Young. Thank you. I have limited time, but if you
    could expand on the importance of federally funded research,
    including the National Science Foundation's National Artificial
    Intelligence Research Institutes, I would appreciate that. And
    then the importance of appropriating the CHIPS and Science
    Act's research authorization, I would note, at a time we are
    discussing artificial intelligence, and the critical importance
    of this to our national security, the National Security
    Commission on AI has recommended funding at $32 billion per
    year beginning in Fiscal Year 2026, artificial intelligence. So
    that lays a predicate for your response.
        Dr. Panchanathan. So as you know, AI of today has been made
    possible because of sustained investments, as I said earlier,
    through AI winters, even, over several decades. Here we are
    right now, and we have an adversarial competitor that is out-
    investing in some of these areas. This is not the time to hold
    back; this is not the time to discuss and debate; this is the
    time to actually invest, out-invest, out-compete in every
    aspect of what we need to do at AI.
        And what we cannot have, and I just want to make this very
    clear, what we cannot have is a situation like what we have in
    semiconductors today, where we are trying to put the Band-Aids
    and trying to get it back into what it needs to work. We cannot
    lose that advantage in AI, or quantum, or advanced wireless, or
    biotechnology, you name it. And I am extremely concerned that
    we are not moving fast enough, because our competitors are
    outpacing us. And yes, we have a strategic advantage; we will
    not, and we should not, and must not lose it.
        The Chair. Thank you.
        Dr. Panchanathan. So thank you for all your support.
        The Chair. Senator Baldwin.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. TAMMY BALDWIN,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

        Senator Baldwin. Thank you, Madam Chair. And welcome to
    both of our witnesses today. Secretary Raimondo, I want to
    thank you for your leadership in executing the Regional
    Technology and Innovation Hub Program. This committee worked
    very hard to craft that program, and the Appropriations
    Committee, on which I also sit, provided the initial funding to
    get this program up and running. And I have heard you loudly
    and clearly that we need to follow through with significant
    additional funding in the years to come.
        As you know, Wisconsin worked hard to submit one sole
    application focused on bio-health and personalized medicine
    technology with a significant private-sector partnership and
    investment. As you also know, we have a rich history of
    innovation, world-class research institutions, and robust
    manufacturing, as well as a very strong workforce and work
    ethic. Wisconsin is poised to become a growth sector in this
    cutting-edge and valuable industry. I do not envy your team's
    task as you look through multiple applications, but I would
    have been remiss if I had not also highlighted our application,
    as many of my colleagues have today.
        Now, shifting a bit, but not much, one of the fundamental
    issues that the CHIPS and Science Act aims to address is the
    too common occurrence of our American companies doing cutting-
    edge research and development in the United States and then
    manufacturing their product elsewhere. That is the story of the
    semiconductor in a nutshell, and part of why the CHIPS Act was
    necessary in the first place.
        Now, current law requires inventions that stem from
    federally funded research to be manufactured in the United
    States, but that requirement is often waived and literally
    approved with just a rubber stamp. For example, a 2022
    investigative report found that breakthrough battery
    technology, invented in a Federal lab and paid for with
    taxpayer dollars, was licensed by the Department of Energy to a
    Chinese company and manufactured in China.
        Now, I know you are not here from the Department of Energy,
    but the Department of Commerce has an incredibly important role
    to play in the solution. Now, earlier this summer, President
    Biden signed the Invent It Here, Make It Here Executive Order.
    It bears a striking resemblance to legislation I introduced
    earlier this year with Senator Vance, which we called the
    Invent Here, Make Here Act. Great minds think alike, that is
    what I will say.
        Our legislation goes a little bit further than the
    executive order; it actually forbids licenses from being
    granted to countries of concern, as defined in CHIPS and
    Science, to include the PRC, among others. So given your role
    in carrying out the executive order and the duties Congress
    granted you in the CHIPS and Science Act over
    commercialization, I am interested to know your thoughts on the
    issue and the need for legislative action in this arena?
        Secretary Raimondo. Thank you. So first of all, I fully
    agree with you that that is what happened with semiconductors,
    right. We used to make them in America, and in search of cheap
    labor, it all fled our shores, and look at where we are now. So
    I strongly support what you are trying to do. I also assure you
    there is no rubber stamping in these waivers.
        We have to be practical; not everything is made in America;
    not everything can be made in America. However, we had a
    fantastic visit in Kenosha; that is a perfect example of
    because we, at the Commerce Department, have been holding their
    feet to the fire of those companies, we said we are not going
    to give you a waiver; we don't believe we need to, and they
    found a way to manufacture in your state.
        Senator Baldwin. And I just want to make the distinction
    between Buy America policies that say when we build out
    broadband, as you announced in Kenosha, Wisconsin, that we
    can't necessarily source, you know, from Nokia if they are not
    going to make it here. But you and, with the Buy America
    language, persuaded them to bring those jobs and that
    technology to the U.S. But here we are talking about new
    inventions funded by taxpayer dollars, and I feel we have a
    special obligation as stewards of our tax dollars to keep the
    manufacturing here.
        Secretary Raimondo. Absolutely. No, no, I agree.
        The Chair. Senator Capito.

                STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA

        Senator Capito. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you both
    for being here with us today, kind of a long afternoon.
    Secretary Raimondo and Dr. Panch, I guess I can call you that.
    I did vote for this bill because I think it is very critical.
    Secretary Raimondo, thank you for all of what you have done in
    broadband. We are looking forward to rolling this out. You and
    I have talked about this more than a few times, and you know
    how very important it is, not just to me, but to the rest of
    the country.
        So I have been really interested to hear that your agency,
    the Department of Commerce, has run into an unexpected hurdle
    in implementing CHIPS, and that being the NEPA process. Well, I
    am on the EPW Committee; I am the Ranking Member, and this is
    an issue; it doesn't matter if it is chip manufacturing,
    broadband development, transmission, energy exploration,
    everything is being held up by the NEPA process, the permitting
    process, and often the ensuing litigation delays that come
    forward.
        So then I heard that there is an--I mean, Senator Cruz has
    an amendment with Senator Kelly to exempt the NEPA process for
    the fabs for this particular bill, that would exempt the NEPA
    process; is that correct? And you spoke in favor of that?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
        Senator Capito. How does this administration, with you as
    their representative, actually square exempting one industry
    over another when it is holding up progress in all of National
    Security, energy security, communication, everything? Why would
    that be a good idea, and how can this Administration think that
    is a good idea?
        Secretary Raimondo. I can only speak to chips, and what I
    said earlier was sometimes these processes could take 10 years
    or 8 years.
        Senator Capito. Right. Right.
        Secretary Raimondo. And each of these would be for chips,
    it is a national security imperative. So what we are doing--but
    of course, I want to be crystal clear, we have to maintain
    basic environmental protections, and we will as we build out
    these manufacturing facilities. We are not looking to get rid
    of environmental protections; we are just looking to have a
    more streamlined process so we can----
        Senator Capito. OK. We agree on that. I am not getting--I
    am not into eliminating environmental protections, but the
    length of all these projects, I would say to you, energy
    security is just as important as chip security. I would say
    transmission in this country is just as important as something
    that does with manufacturing chips. And then if you are going
    to manufacture the chips, you have got to mine them, and
    recover them. And that means you have to permit the mine.
        If you look at arsenic, which is used in chips, 97 percent
    of that is from China. If you look at cobalt 70 percent of that
    is from China, rare earth elements, 60 percent of that is from
    China, 10 percent from the United States, titanium, 86 percent
    from Japan, noble gases are from Russia and Ukraine, but we
    have these resources in this country, but we can't get these
    mines to permit.
        So how are you going to go from permitting the fab when you
    can't get the material materials permitted? There is a
    disconnect here. And you know I would be fine to try to work
    this disconnect out because, as I said in the beginning, I
    think this is exceedingly important for our future.
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes, as you say, this is complicated,
    and there is a balance. I know that the Chair, in a bipartisan
    way, has worked on an amendment in the NDAA as it relates to
    chips. I am no way saying that these other issues aren't also
    so important and they, you know, merit further discussion.
        Senator Capito. Well, I mean, I just think it is rather
    ironic the administration would actually make an exception for
    something they consider a marquee plan for them, albeit, in the
    best interest of the country when there is these other things
    that I think, politically, are more difficult to touch that
    they wouldn't look for the streamlining of permitting, which
    should be fair and even across the board without giving up any
    environmental controls. I sit on the Committee that does this.
    I have been very strong on air and water all the way through,
    but there is a better way to do it.
        Let me just ask you one quick question, and then you can
    respond. I think you have been asked this before, but I do
    obviously have my West Virginia Tech Hub application in, and we
    are all putting our foot on the scale for our own projects. I
    understand the program requires one-third of Tech Hub Grants
    and designations must significantly benefit a small and rural
    community, so that means one out of the three hub designations
    under phase two would be awarded to rural communities; is that
    a safe statement?
        Secretary Raimondo. One--yes.
        Senator Capito. OK, yes, one-third?
        Secretary Raimondo. Rural, right, one third--the statutory
    requirement is one-third in rural or small communities, yes.
        Senator Capito. OK. So that is still the plan?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes. Yes.
        Senator Capito. OK. Thank you.
        The Chair. Thank you. Senator Sinema.
        Senator Capito. All right. Sorry.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. KYRSTEN SINEMA,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA

        Senator Sinema. Thank you, Chair Cantwell.
        The Chair. Two people left, just hurry, if we can. Thank
    you so much.
        Senator Sinema. Well, thank you for our witnesses joining
    us today, and I am proud to play the central role, in ensuring
    that the historic CHIPS and Science Act was signed into law. A
    year later, the positive impact on our economy and national
    security is clear, and nowhere is this more evident than in my
    state, Arizona. You know, we have led on CHIPS since the 1940s,
    and we will continue to lead with the help of the CHIPS and
    Science Act.
        I was delighted to see the Department of Defense select
    Arizona State University's Southwest Advanced Prototyping Hub
    as the first and largest allocation from the law to continue
    its great work accelerating micro-electronic research and
    development. In fact, since 2020, Arizona has led the Nation in
    semiconductor investment. This includes major projects from
    Intel and TSMC.
        These investments are essential, but Arizona's leading
    semiconductor manufacturing ecosystem is built on the hundreds
    of chip-related companies working at all phases of the
    manufacturing lifecycle, as well as the academic institutions,
    workforce training programs, and small businesses that make it
    possible.
        And that is why it was so important to address
    semiconductor manufacturing holistically. You know, there was a
    time when it looked like the scientific development portions of
    the law would fall victim to partisan fighting, and thankfully,
    Senator Young, myself, and other members worked across the
    aisle to make sure that didn't happen.
        So turning to our witnesses, I want to first start by
    welcoming and recognizing my friend and fellow Arizonan, Panch,
    and the amazing work that you are doing at NSF.
        Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you.
        Senator Sinema. You know, I got to see your work advancing
    education, science, and innovation firsthand at ASU, and in the
    senior advisory roles you played in our state government, and
    now I see that same dedicated insight implementing this
    legislation at the Federal level. So thank you, Panch.
        Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you.
        Senator Sinema. My first question for you is that the
    workforce provisions of the law, including the CHIPS for
    America Workforce Education Fund, are essential to building a
    healthy economy and fueling rewarding careers. Can you just
    briefly comment on how the NSF funding, along with public-
    private partnerships have helped to get resources where they
    are needed, specifically in Arizona?
        Dr. Panchanathan. Thank you very much, Senator Sinema. It
    is truly a pleasure to hear from you, and you are just taking
    me back to the years in Arizona by what you said. So it is
    always a pleasure. The workforce investments that we are making
    through the CHIPS and Science Act, is a total of $200 million
    over 5 years, this year it is $25 million, we are focusing on
    ensuring that pairing up with the investments by Intel and
    Micron as our partners who are co-investing with us, are being
    deployed in ensuring that we are training the workforce.
        Not only in terms of what we do with community colleges and
    universities, but also training the trainers, namely the
    teachers in K-12 institutions, so that we have this pipeline of
    talent ensured for times to come. So we are working on all of
    those component parts as we are thinking about deploying these
    resources. We are also working on some projects which are
    focused on internships with industry, as well as making sure
    that upskilling, reskilling efforts are also invested in. So it
    is a comprehensive investment of what we are doing with CHIPS
    and Science, as well as the main investments of NSF, which has
    always prioritized key technologies like semiconductor
    technologies.
        So we are very happy, and we are looking forward to the
    outcomes, which is very important at this time when there is so
    much of a need for a trained, skilled technical workforce in
    semiconductors, as was pointed out by many of the senators
    today. So thank you so much for your support and championship
    of this CHIPS and Science Act.
        Senator Sinema. Well, thanks so much, Panch.
        Secretary Raimondo, I appreciate the vision you outlined
    today for the Department's economic and national security
    priorities, at the heart of the CHIPS and Science Act. To keep
    pace with these goals, like establishing large-scale clusters
    of leading-edge logic fabs, while ensuring supply chain
    resilience and a robust American workforce, the chip projects
    must actually be funded to be workable.
        Unfortunately, the NEPA reviews currently required for
    CHIPS grants could slow down the fund dispersal to grantees and
    prevent actual construction by 2 years or more from the date
    the Department decides to start an environmental impact. This
    is a huge barrier to bringing new capacity online with the
    urgency required. Thankfully, I worked this summer to include
    our bipartisan provisions in the NDAA that would streamline
    Federal reviews while keeping environmental protections in
    place.
        You testified previously before the House Science Committee
    that you support this language, and I just want to check with
    you: Do you still support it?
        Secretary Raimondo. Yes.
        Senator Sinema. Great. Madam Chair, I have follow up
    questions that I will send over to the Secretary and to Panch.
    But in the interest of time, I will yield back for another
    member.
        The Chair. Thank you so much. Senator Budd.

                      STATEMENT OF HON. TED BUDD,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA

        Senator Budd. Thank you, Madam Chair. Secretary Raimondo,
    thank you for being here. Thank you both for being here.
        The Commerce Department has a lot of important rollout
    responsibilities with the CHIPS and Science Act and the
    Broadband, Equity, Access and Deployment, or the BEAD Program,
    we have talked a lot about that here today. So I hope that you
    would agree that your Department needs to carefully adhere to
    Congress' intent in both of those laws.
        Unfortunately, serious concerns are coming to light about
    this administration's handling of $65 billion going to
    broadband. Over the summer, the Commerce Department's Inspector
    General issued an alert stating that Commerce is failing to do
    basic checks, resulting in potential unlawful duplication.
    Recently, The Wall Street Journal reported that Commerce-funded
    broadband will cost more to bring broadband to a home than the
    assessed value of that home. That is The Wall Street Journal.
        And 2 weeks ago, after months of letters from my colleagues
    and I, with concerns that have been ignored, we released a
    report that found this administration is unlikely to reach all
    connected Americans with broadband. Now, this is due in large
    part to this administration's extreme bias against non-fiber
    technologies, technologies like fixed wireless, and satellite
    broadband, and then also its allocation of funding to parts of
    the country that already have high-speed broadband, like right
    here in Washington, D.C., unfortunately.
        And as the report went on to uncover, the Department of
    Commerce allocated Washington, D.C. more than $547,000 per
    unserved location. 33 percent of those locations are at the
    national zoo. This is a waste of taxpayer money. I think that
    most taxpayers would be horrified by the prospect of spending
    upwards of $100,000 or $200,000 to connect a single location,
    especially when many of these homes could be connected by
    alternative or innovative technologies at an exponentially
    lower cost to taxpayers.
        So the question: Would it be better for taxpayers to spend
    $200,000 on a fiber connection to a single home that is worth
    $50,000? That is $200,000 to connect it; that is a connection
    fee and cost to a home worth $50,000? Or would it be better to
    spend $500 connecting that house to high-speed satellite?
        Secretary Raimondo. Thank you, Senator, for your question.
    First, I want to say the statute provides for 100----
        Senator Budd. Yes. Let us just go back. Thank you. Thank
    you for the elaboration. I know it is into the day, but if you
    could just answer: Is it better to spend $200,000 on a $50,000
    house, or is it better to spend $500 connecting it to
    satellite?
        Secretary Raimondo. It depends on the quality. The five-
    year----
        Senator Budd. So you are saying it might be worth spending
    $200,000 of everyone's taxpayer money to connect to a $50,000
    house when you could do it for $500. Did I hear that correctly,
    madam?
        Secretary Raimondo. First of all, this isn't my decision.
    Your Governor in your state will provide a plan. Our job is to
    make sure that at the end of that plan, every single North
    Carolinian, regardless of where they live, has high-quality,
    affordable internet.
        Senator Budd. Look, I appreciate that, but I don't need to
    be spending $200,000----
        Secretary Raimondo. Low-quality satellite doesn't help
    anyone.
        Senator Budd. Here is what is happening. Let me get to the
    point. Thank you, madam. Would it be worthwhile, because here
    is what is actually happening: Would it be worthwhile for
    taxpayers to spend $200,000 on a fiber connection to a mansion
    that is worth $5 million?
        Secretary Raimondo. Nobody says fiber has to be used, and I
    doubt the mansion is unconnected.
        Senator Budd. Well, there seems to be a bias toward fiber.
    That is what is happening. It is happening right now because
    the Biden Administration, it has shunned wireless and satellite
    alternatives. Further, Biden's BEAD rules allow taxpayers'
    subsidies to go toward building fiber to mansions and vacation
    homes. These rules prohibit states from funding nonfiber
    projects, except in extreme situations.
        Now, these are extreme situations, which you may have begun
    to elaborate on, but unless they get a waiver, a waiver from
    the Federal Government to do the alternative. So I urge you to
    eliminate tech bias from your rules, and put in sensible limits
    that would stop subsidizing millionaires.
        And in my remaining time, Madam Chair, I would like to
    mention this report put out by the Ranking Member, the Red
    Light Report, which is to stop waste, fraud, and abuse in
    Federal broadband funding. And I would like to submit it for
    the record.
        The Chair. Without objection.
        [The information referred to follows:]

        GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT

        Senator Budd. Thank you. And I yield back, Madam Chair.
        The Chair. Thank you. I don't see Senator Sullivan. I know
    he wanted to ask questions, but I don't see them on the screen.
    So I am just going to ask a few and then wrap it up here so
    that you can get on to these meetings that you both have.
        Secretary Raimondo, supply chain resiliency depends on
    security. So there is a lot of discussion around here in the
    last several months about how to best get that, particularly
    when you are--it could be backdoor attempts to information and
    communication technology, and data that can be used illegally
    for surveillance, or espionage, or various things.
        We have looked at this issue and suggested--well, and had
    been suggested to us from the Administration that something
    like the GUARD Act, which would give Commerce--when we think
    about this information age in technology and export and import
    controls, one thing is clear: We need a little better tool on
    the control of flow of what could be a backdoor of information,
    or information that is just used in a way for purposes not
    friendly to our country, like illegal foreign surveillance.
        So we are concerned about targeting of military members,
    their families, immigrants. What do you think we should do
    about this? And what do you think about the GUARD Act proposal?
        Secretary Raimondo. I am very supportive of the GUARD Act
    proposal, I am often asked, should we outlaw TikTok? This is
    bigger than TikTok. Certainly, TikTok poses national security
    risks, to be clear. But we need a comprehensive plan to update.
    As you say, the threats are different today than they were 10
    years ago. And so the right way to do this is to have--to
    empower us with a statutory set of tools to have a
    comprehensive approach to these connected apps that pose the
    national security risks, to say, TikTok, and others. And so I
    am supportive of attacking it in a comprehensive, statutory
    way.
        The Chair. And so, appreciate that.
        Director Panch, we are oversubscribed on the NSF side. We
    are oversubscribed. How do we from a--I suggest that we have
    more conversation about this, but how do we, from a scientific
    side, tell our colleagues on the Appropriations side that there
    is so much in the pipeline that could--I love all these
    questions about both where we go, because obviously the bill is
    about creating a distributed generation of R&D. And we already
    are pretty distributive, pretty competitive way better than a
    top-down model of say, other countries.
        But I always say that two guys named Bill created our
    economies: Bill Boeing and Bill Gates, right? So you never know
    where the next Bill is going to come from.
        Dr. Panchanathan. Exactly.
        The Chair. And so that is why we want a more distributed
    generation of R&D. But what are we going to do about the
    shortfall with our appropriators that there is so much in the
    pipeline that could be effective?
        Dr. Panchanathan. At so many levels. I am so glad, Chair
    Cantwell, you have been a strong supporter and a champion of
    the CHIPS and Science Act. And I know how hard you worked, so
    thank you very much. On behalf of the Science and Technology
    Community, we owe you a debt of gratitude, and all the folks
    that supported this.
        So I just want to say that, let me take the basic research
    paradigm: 50,000 proposals, we fund 11,000 of them, 20,000 of
    them are being told that we should fund them. They are highly
    meritorious. We are leaving them on the chopping floor, which
    means a huge loss. And our competitors are taking advantage of
    that.
        On the Regional Innovation Engines and Regional Technology
    Hubs that the Secretary talked about, they have 400 proposals.
    We had 700 proposals. And then we had another 130 proposals in
    type 2. We are not going to be able to fund all the top-quality
    proposals that need to be invested in. These are ideas that are
    being left behind.
        The Chair. Here is what I suggest, that we get an answer
    from the scientific community about the science necessary on
    these proposals. Like, yes, you get an A on your paper. It is
    definitely where we should be investing. But we don't have the
    resources.
        Dr. Panchanathan. Yes. Yes.
        The Chair. That is what I think we need, not that we want
    some people to have failing grades on these proposals, but so
    that we are prioritizing and people can see that this is really
    needed.
        OK. This hearing will remain open for--the record will
    remain open for 4 weeks, until November 1, 2023. Any senators
    liking to submit questions for the record can do so two weeks
    from now, by October 18. And we ask that responses to this be
    done by November 1.
        So thank you to the witnesses, thank you to all our
    colleagues. We kind of had a double feature today in the
    Committee, but we had very good attendance at both, which I
    think it shows the interest of members, particularly this
    afternoon in this very important legislation. Thank you both
    for your tremendous leadership on America's competitiveness. We
    are adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 4:46 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                A P P E N D I X

    GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT

                                     ______

                                    National Science Foundation
                                                         March 30, 2023

    Hon. Dan Sullivan,
    United States Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Senator Sullivan:

        Thank you for your letter of February 1, 2023, regarding the U.S.
    National Science Foundation's (NSF's) funding for research in advanced
    energy and industrial efficiency in support of our national security
    and global economic competitiveness.
        With the passage of the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, Congress put
    in place a roadmap for accelerating and expanding the Nation's research
    enterprise and creating opportunities for innovation in communities
    throughout the country. The law positions NSF to capitalize on the
    American research ecosystem comprised of academia, private industry,
    the Federal government, and other partners to quickly translate
    research in key technology areas into impacts that benefit the Nation.
    One of those key technologies is advanced energy, and NSF recognizes
    that our Nation's future depends on winning the research, innovation,
    translation and education race to transform the energy sector. NSF
    advances our energy future through investments in fundamental research
    that transforms energy systems and enables new energy industries;
    innovation to move discoveries to the market and society quickly; and
    education and workforce development, with a focus on preparing for the
    energy jobs of the future. NSF's energy investments complement and
    align with our investments in infrastructure resilience and
    sustainability.
        NSF's investments in energy technology support high-risk, high-
    reward research ideas across the science and engineering spectrum that
    create broad new understanding and enable future innovations. For
    example, starting in the 1970s and 1980s, NSF provided support to Dr.
    John B. Goodenough and Dr. Stanley Whittingham for research that led to
    the development of the lithium-ion battery and was honored with a Nobel
    Prize in 2019.
        Current investment in advanced energy research continues to expand
    scientific foundations to change paradigms and spawn innovations for
    our Nation's future energy supply, distribution, storage and use. They
    span a wide range of research that will lead to improvements in
    generation, conversion, storage, and distribution of electricity and
    fuels. NSF-funded researchers are pursuing breakthroughs in advanced
    energy sources, such as plasma-assisted ignition of hydrocarbon
    mixtures at the University of Texas at Austin; development of new
    energy materials; more efficient energy usage, including industrial
    efficiency; understanding social, behavioral, and economic aspects such
    as barriers and opportunities for technology adoption; as well as
    research related to infrastructure and systems, such as sustainable
    transit/vehicle technologies, building efficiency, sustainable
    computing, decarbonized manufacturing, and interconnected natural,
    human-built, and social systems.
        NSF supports transformative, large-scale research on foundational
    and use-inspired challenges through programs for Centers for Chemical
    Innovation, Expeditions in Computing, Engineering Research Centers,
    Industry-University Cooperative Research Centers, and others. NSF-
    funded research centers play a key role in bringing researchers
    together to tackle challenges across the innovation landscape,
    including in advanced energy. For example, researchers at NSF's
    Engineering Research Center (ERC) led by Utah State University with
    Purdue University, the University of Colorado, and the University of
    Texas at El Paso are developing technologies for roadway
    electrification, and an ERC led by Purdue University is working on
    conversion of light hydrocarbons to chemicals and transportation fuels.
        With our investments in unique funding opportunities and
    partnerships that foster co-design, co-creation, piloting, and
    prototyping, NSF also accelerates the translation of research results
    to the market and society, catalyzing a broad spectrum of advanced
    energy technologies and systems. NSF speeds translation of fundamental
    discoveries in advanced energy into technologies and systems through
    center programs with industry partners and through the NSF Lab-to-
    Market Platform comprising Partnerships for Innovation, NSF Innovation
    Corps (NSF I-CorpsTM), and the Small Business Innovation
    Research and Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) programs.
    NSF-funded small businesses are developing technologies and materials
    for new batteries, lithium battery recycling, carbon dioxide
    conversion, advanced solar, fusion and electromagnetics, and
    technologies that reduce energy intensity and resources. For example,
    Syzygy Plasmonics, an NSF-funded small business, is developing a
    photocatalytic reactor designed to electrify chemical manufacturing.
    The Houston-based company's reactor is powered by light instead of heat
    and operates at a lower temperature than conventional chemical reactor
    technology.
        NSF will continue to attract, inspire, educate, train and reskill/
    upskill individuals, from K-12 to college and industry, to grow a
    diverse and engaged advanced energy across the Nation. For example, the
    Advanced Technological Education Network for Utilities and Energy
    Technical Education project at Northeast Wisconsin Technical College
    seeks to address current and anticipated utility and energy industry
    workforce and training needs. This project is supported by the NSF
    Advanced Technological Education (ATE) program, which supports the
    education of technicians for the high-technology fields that drive our
    Nation's economy, with a focus on two-year institutions of higher
    education.
        We greatly appreciate your interest in the work of the National
    Science Foundation. Please feel free to contact Amanda Hallberg
    Greenwell, Head of the Office of Legislative and Public Affairs, at
    (703) 292-8070 if you have any additional questions.
                Sincerely,
                                       Sethuraman Panchanathan,
                                                              Director.
    Identical letter to:
    The Honorable Roger F. Wicker
    The Honorable John Cornyn
    The Honorable Todd Young
                                     ______

                            Associated Builders and Contractors
                                                        October 4, 2023

    Hon. Maria Cantwell,
    Chair,
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Ted Cruz,
    Ranking Member,
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC.

    Chairman Cantwell, Ranking Member Cruz and Members of the U.S. Senate
                Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation:

        On behalf of Associated Builders and Contractors, a national
    construction industry trade association with 68 chapters representing
    more than 22,000 member companies, we thank you for holding the
    hearing, ``CHIPS and Science Implementation and Oversight.''
        As the committee continues to lead Congress' oversight of the
    implementation and oversight of the CHIPS and Science Act by the U.S.
    Department of Commerce and the National Science Foundation, ABC will
    comment on specific policies that the department is pursuing outside of
    congressional authorization/intent.
    Implementation of the CHIPS and Science Act and Project Labor
            Agreements
        The CHIPS and Science Act provides $39 billion in Federal grants,
    loans and loan guarantees to rebuild America's semiconductor
    manufacturing capacities and allows companies a 25 percent advanced
    manufacturing investment tax credit.
        We are concerned with the Department of Commerce National Institute
    of Standards and Technology's promotion of policy \1\ that seems to
    give priority consideration to private-sector stakeholder applications
    for the CHIPS Incentives Program's Commercial Fabrication Facilities
    Notice of Funding Opportunity,\2\ which pledges to require its
    construction contractors to execute a project labor agreement with
    various construction trade unions while building a semiconductor
    manufacturing facility.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ See page 21 of the Commerce Department's National Institute of
    Standards and Technology's CHIPS Incentives Program--Commercial
    Fabrication Facilities--Notice of Funding Opportunity 2023-NIST-CHIPS-
    CFF-01, released Feb. 28, 2023: https://www.nist.gov/system/files/
    documents/2023/02/28/CHIPS-
    Commercial_Fabrication_Facilities_NOFO_0.pdf.
        \2\ See https://www.nist.gov/chips/notice-funding-opportunity-
    commercial-fabrication-facilities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        A PLA preference policy in the Department of Commerce's grant
    program could undermine congressional authority, as the bipartisan
    CHIPS and Science Act contained no such language and jeopardizes public
    investment in semiconductor manufacturing facilities. Its inclusion
    will further exacerbate a shortage of construction industry skilled
    labor; discourage competition from quality large, small and
    disadvantaged construction businesses; and needlessly increase
    construction costs for applicants at the expense of taxpayers and
    national trade and security objectives.
        A PLA is a jobsite-specific collective bargaining agreement unique
    to the construction industry that typically requires companies to agree
    to recognize unions as the representatives of their employees on that
    project, use the union hiring hall to obtain most or all construction
    labor, exclusively hire apprentices from union programs, follow union
    work rules and pay into union benefit and multiemployer pension plans
    that nonunion employees could not access. This forces employers to pay
    ``double benefits'' into their existing plans and union plans, puts
    them at a significant competitive disadvantage and exposes them to
    unfunded multiemployer pension plan liabilities. In addition, PLAs
    typically require construction workers to pay union dues and/or join a
    union if they want to receive union benefits and work on a PLA project.
    If they do not satisfy these stipulations, nonunion workers lose an
    estimated 34 percent of their wages and benefits to union coffers and
    benefits plans--making them the victims of wage theft.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ McGowan, John R., Ph.D., CPA, Government-Mandated Project Labor
    Agreements Result in Lost and Stolen Wages for Employees and Excessive
    Costs and Liability Exposure for Employers, October 2021.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        When mandated as a result of government policy, PLAs exacerbate the
    construction industry's estimated skilled labor shortage of more than
    half a million workers in 2023 \4\ by unfairly discouraging competition
    from quality nonunion contractors and their employees, who comprise
    88.3 percent of the private U.S. construction industry.\5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ See www.abc.org/wfshortage.
        \5\ See bls.gov Union Members Summary, Jan. 19, 2023, https://
    www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.t03.htm.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In addition, PLAs can interfere with existing union collective
    bargaining agreements. This may prevent some unionized firms from
    competing for a project, because they are prohibited from using labor
    from signatory unions not included in the jobsite's PLA, which is why
    some union organizations and contracting groups oppose government-
    mandated PLAs.
        Multiple studies of hundreds of taxpayer-funded affordable housing
    \6\ and school construction \7\ projects found that government PLA
    mandates increase the cost of construction by 12 percent to 20 percent
    compared to similar non-PLA projects already subjected to prevailing
    wage regulations.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ Ward, Jason M., The Effects of Project Labor Agreements on the
    Production of Affordable Housing: Evidence from Proposition HHH. Santa
    Monica, California. RAND Corp., 2021. https://www.rand.org/pubs/
    research_reports/RRA1362-1.html.
        \7\ See five studies, available at https://buildamericalocal.com/
    learn-more/#gmpla-studies, measuring the impact of PLA mandates on
    public school construction already subject to state prevailing wage
    laws in Connecticut (2020), Massachusetts (2006), New Jersey (2019),
    New York (2006) and Ohio (2017) by the Beacon Hill Institute (http://
    beaconhill.org/labor-economics/); an October 2010 report by the New
    Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Annual Report to
    the Governor and Legislature: Use of Project Labor Agreements in Public
    Works Building Projects in Fiscal Year 2008 (https://www.nj.gov/labor/
    forms_pdfs/legal/2010/PLAReportOct2010.pdf); and a 2011 study by the
    National University System Institute for Policy Research, Measuring the
    Cost of Project Labor Agreements on School Construction in California
    (http://www.nusinstitute.org/assets/resources/pageResources/Measuring-
    the-Cost-of-Project-Labor-Agreements-on-School-Construction-in-
    California.pdf).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Simply put, hardworking taxpayers could get less and pay more as a
    result of pro-PLA policies. In contrast, taxpayer dollars are spent
    responsibly by letting the market determine if a PLA is appropriate and
    fostering fair and open competition among the best contractors and
    skilled workers in America.
        While ABC outright opposes the NOFO's PLA preference policy, we
    appreciate the NOFO's inclusion of an alternative in the form of
    workforce continuity plans.\8\ We urge the Department of Commerce to
    clarify whether developers who utilize this PLA requirement alternative
    would be penalized in their application process and if preference would
    be given to those applications with PLAs included. As outlined above,
    the department must consider the negative impacts on competition and
    industry labor challenges that discouraging more than 88 percent of the
    construction workforce from competing on CHIPS Act projects would
    cause.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ See page 53 and 54 of the NOFO under part b. Construction
    Workforce Plan: https://www.
    nist.gov/system/files/documents/2023/06/23/CHIPS-
    Commercial%20Fabrication%20Facilities
    %20NOFO%20Amendment%201.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Effects of the CHIPS Act's Restrictive Labor Requirements
        On Aug. 8, 2023, the U.S. Department of Labor released a final
    rule, Updating the Davis-Bacon and Related Act Regulations, which makes
    drastic revisions to the Davis-Bacon Act and Related Acts regulations
    that apply to Federal and federally assisted construction projects
    funded by taxpayers.
        The DOL's final rule, effective Oct. 23, 2023, mostly disregards
    the feedback of ABC contractors, construction industry stakeholders and
    thousands of small businesses urging the withdrawal of this
    unnecessary, costly and burdensome regulation. Instead, the DOL is
    moving forward with dramatic changes to prevailing wage regulations,
    reversing much-needed reforms and unlawfully increasing the regulatory
    burden on small businesses, new industries and public works projects.
        Included in the legislative language of the CHIPS and Science Act--
    unlike the PLA issue noted above--Davis-Bacon Act requirements will
    have inflationary and anti-competitive effects on projects. Less
    competition from small businesses and nonunion firms caused by the
    misguided inclusion of Davis-Bacon requirements--coupled with the
    recent controversial Davis-Bacon Act rulemaking--will result in less
    return on investment in taxpayer dollars and could lead to project
    delays.
        The Department of Commerce must consider the unnecessary cost
    increases that will be imposed by existing Davis-Bacon Act
    requirements. Additionally, ABC urges the department to consider the
    impacts the numerous, drastic changes imposed by the August 2023 Davis-
    Bacon rule on the costs of the projects funded by the CHIPS and Science
    Act and how the new regulation may restrict the ability of small
    businesses' opportunities to compete on those projects.
        Thank you for your consideration of ABC's concerns.
                Sincerely,
                                            Kristen Swearingen,
                       Vice President, Legislative & Political Affairs.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
    CHIPS Supply Chain
        One of the most critical reasons we passed CHIPS was because of the
    semiconductor shortages spurred by the 2020 pandemic. Lifesaving
    medical devices like pacemakers couldn't get chips. Consumers saw car
    prices rise as much as 40 percent. In the State of Washington State,
    truck manufacturer PACCAR was forced to leave unfinished trucks in the
    lots because they didn't have access to semiconductors. That's why
    Congress acted to invest in reshoring production of semiconductors.

        Question 1. How is the Department using CHIPS funds to ensure a
    future pandemic, natural disaster, or other crisis won't cripple our
    supply chains?
        Answer. While COVID-19 was unprecedented, it revealed structural
    problems with semiconductor supply-chain management that will endure
    unless actively addressed. Firms both upstream and downstream of
    chipmakers typically have limited visibility into their supply chains,
    often having knowledge of only their immediate customers and suppliers.
    Purchasing often involves the use of third-party distributors and
    short-term purchase contracts. These features make it difficult for
    companies to assess supply chain risks and to diagnose and address
    shortages as they arise. In addition, current generation and mature-
    node production is geographically concentrated, with East Asia
    accounting for the majority of global capacity in the legacy space and
    the Chinese government actively subsidizing additional investment in
    legacy production.
        As outlined in the Commerce Department's ``Vision for Success:
    Commercial Fabrication Facilities'' paper, the Department's four
    strategic objectives include:

       First, for leading-edge logic, our goal is to both design
            and produce the most advanced chips here, in the United States,
            by the end of the decade. Right now, we manufacture zero of the
            world's most advanced chips on our shores. Specifically, by the
            end of the decade, the United States will have at least two new
            large-scale clusters of leading-edge logic fabs, with each
            cluster including multiple commercial-scale fabs, a large and
            skilled workforce, nearby suppliers, R&D facilities, and
            specialized infrastructure.

       Second, the United States will be home to multiple high-
            volume advanced packaging facilities. Packaging-the process of
            putting fabricated chips into containers that will ultimately
            be embedded in products-is an essential part of the
            manufacturing process, and one that will be core to new
            innovations in functionality and efficiency.

       Third, U.S.-based fabs will produce high-volume Dynamic
            Random-Access Memory (DRAM) memory chips on economically
            competitive terms.

       And fourth, the United States will have increased its
            production capacity for the current-generation and mature chips
            that are vital to U.S. economic and national security.
    CHIPS Underfunded
        The CHIPS and Science Act authorized nearly $250 billion in
    investments for manufacturing, research, and development which is
    critical for the U.S. to continue to be the world leader in innovation
    and competition. But we've seen in just the last year that these
    authorization levels haven't been matched by appropriations.
        A report from the Federation of American Scientists shows that the
    Fiscal Year 2023 omnibus appropriations bill fell short of CHIPS levels
    by $3 billion, and the Fiscal Year 2024 appropriations are expected to
    fall short by nearly $7.5 billion. The authorization levels in this Act
    are critical to ensuring our future success. That's why I led a letter
    to the Appropriators asking them to fully fund CHIPS and Science
    programs.

        Question 1. What will the consequences be for U.S. leadership in
    science, technology, and innovation if appropriations don't match the
    levels authorized in CHIPS and Science?
        Answer. The Department's ability to use the already-authorized
    funding to implement research and development provisions of the CHIPS
    and Science Act is dependent on the enactment of an annual
    appropriations act, which makes available a new tranche of funding for
    obligation in each Fiscal Year. The research, innovation, and
    manufacturing sparked by this historic law can enable the United States
    to be the world's technological superpower, securing our economic and
    national security future for the coming decades.
        To fulfill the promise of the CHIPS and Science Act and ensure that
    the United States leads the world in critical and emerging
    technologies, we need robust, sustained investments. For example, the
    CHIPS and Science Act reauthorized the National Institute of Standards
    and Technology (NIST) through 2027, codifying existing programs and
    establishing new programs and activities. The authorization levels in
    the CHIPS and Science Act for NIST include a total of $1.55 billion in
    Fiscal Year (FY) 2023. The FY 2023 Omnibus spending bill provided NIST
    $1.23 billion (not including earmarks) leaving approximately $320
    million in unfunded research promotes U.S. competitiveness as other
    countries are ramping up their investments in critical and emerging
    technologies. Funding requested in the Commerce Department's FY 2025
    budget for implementation of certain CHIPS and Science Act provisions
    that were authorized but not appropriated include:

       Artificial Intelligence (+$47.7 million) to invest in the
            United States AI Safety Institute and expand upon Executive
            Order 14110 to conduct AI research, establish testing
            infrastructure and advance methods to create benchmarks and
            measurements for AI system evaluation, develop technical
            guidance and facilitate the development of standards and
            implement best practices and frameworks.

       Quantum Information Science (+$13.9 million) to identify
            post-quantum cryptography, develop measurements for large-scale
            quantum systems, identify and mitigate limiting factors for
            high-performance quantum computers, train a quantum-ready
            workforce, and ensure a leadership role in global quantum
            standards development.

        As part of the Department's commitment to creating good-paying jobs
    and ensuring that no community is left behind, another key element of
    the CHIPS and Science Act is the Distressed Area Recompete Pilot
    Program (Recompete), housed in the Economic Development Administration
    (EDA). Recompete targets the hardest-hit and most economically
    distressed communities where prime-age (25-54 years) employment is
    significantly lower than the national average, with the goal to close
    this gap through flexible, locally-driven investments. The Recompete
    program aims to catalyze long-term economic opportunity through these
    investments that target the unique underlying conditions of a
    particular place. Through its bottom-up, community-driven approach,
    Recompete will provide employment opportunities in concentrated areas.
    Through a two-phase competition, Recompete will provide
    transformational investments of approximately $20-$50 million to 4-8
    communities across the country.
        In December of last year, EDA announced 22 Recompete Finalists
    located across 20 states and Territories that represent a cross-section
    of urban and rural regions. Phase 2 investments will range from $20-$50
    million and can be used to support a wide range of implementation
    activities across workforce development, business and entrepreneur
    development, infrastructure, and additional planning, predevelopment,
    or technical assistance. EDA also awarded 24 Strategy Development
    Grants (SDG) to help communities significantly increase local
    coordination and planning activities. Such development could make
    selected grantees more competitive for any future Recompete funding.
        The FY 2024 President's Budget requests another $200 million of
    Recompete's authorized funding level. This would allow EDA to make more
    grant awards to communities that have been for too long been forgotten
    through future rounds of the program in areas like workforce training,
    small business supports, infrastructure investments, and other critical
    investments to move the needle.
        The Economic Development Administration's Regional Technology and
    Innovation Hubs (Tech Hubs) program is working to create regional
    innovation centers across the country by bringing together industry,
    higher education institutions, state and local governments, economic
    development organizations, and labor and workforce partners to
    supercharge ecosystems of innovation for technologies that are
    essential to our national security and economic competitiveness. The
    Tech Hubs program is a key part of President Biden's Investing in
    America agenda, stimulating private sector investment, creating good-
    paying jobs, revitalizing American manufacturing, and ensuring no
    community is left behind by America's economic progress.
        Through the Tech Hubs program, the Department is committed to
    strengthening economic and national security by advancing the
    capacities of regions to manufacture, commercialize, and deploy these
    technologies, guided by the following priorities: 1) making more U.S.
    regions strong competitors in the global innovation economy; 2)
    building strong communities that share in the prosperity technological
    innovations bring; 3) spurring the creation of new good jobs and other
    opportunities for workers at all skill levels; and 4) strengthening and
    increasing the resilience of the supply chains that our innovative
    technology-centric industries rely on to stay secure and competitive.
        On October 23, 2023, EDA announced the winners of Phase 1 of the
    Tech Hubs program, and posted the Notice of Funding Opportunity for
    Phase 2. This announcement included 31 designated Tech Hubs across 32
    states and Puerto Rico, as well as the 29 consortia that will receive
    Strategy Development Grants. The 31 designated Tech Hubs focus on
    developing and growing innovative industries in regions across the
    country, including semiconductors, clean energy, critical minerals,
    biotechnology, precision medicine, artificial intelligence, quantum
    computing, and more. The Department is grateful to Congress for the
    $500 million in appropriations that we received in FY 2023 to catalyze
    investment in technologies critical to economic growth, national
    security, and job creation, and help communities across the country
    become centers of innovation critical to American competitiveness.
        This amount, however, represents only five percent of the $10
    billion that was authorized through the CHIPS and Science Act. At this
    funding level, EDA is only able to invest approximately $40-70 million
    in each of approximately 5-10 Hubs, while the authorization envisions
    investments of hundreds of millions and up to $1 billion in 20 or more
    Hubs across the country. Based on the level of interest EDA saw in
    Phase 1--nearly 400 applications, including nearly 200 seeking to
    compete for these large investments--demand exceeds our currently
    available funds by 100x when considering both applications received and
    maximum possible investment levels.
        At current funding levels, not every deserving, high-potential
    applicant will be designated a Tech Hub or receive funding. The
    President's budget requests the next $4 billion of the authorized
    level, putting EDA on track to invest more funding in more Hubs through
    future rounds of the program so regions can create and implement
    innovation-based growth strategies and access the concentrated
    investments that will unlock solutions to grand challenges, equitably
    increase individual prosperity, and strengthen U.S. global
    competitiveness.
    Manufacturing USA Institutes
        The CHIPS and Science Act and Fiscal Year 2023 Omnibus
    Appropriations bill authorized and funded new Manufacturing USA
    (``MUSA'') Institutes through the Department of Commerce and the
    National Institute of Standards and Technology (``NIST'').
        The legislation also directs the Department to pursue geographic
    diversity--there are currently no MUSA institutes in the Pacific
    Northwest, and only 3 west of the Mississippi.
        In August, I wrote to the Department and NIST about ensuring a
    successful selection of a new MUSA Institute. And in January, I wrote a
    letter calling for a Manufacturing USA Institute to help research,
    develop, and rapidly translate new aerospace materials technologies to
    market and to train the domestic manufacturing workforce necessary to
    make this possible. In my state alone, we are looking at a 60,000 STEM
    worker shortfall by 2026, with significant shortages in the aviation
    and space sector, particularly in machinists.

        Question 1. I believe that collaboration between NIST, Labor, and
    industry is needed to keep the U.S. competitive in advanced
    manufacturing and to train the modern aerospace workforce. Will you
    commit to working on this issue and pushing for new facilities for
    advanced aerospace materials, manufacturing, and workforce development?

        Question 2. The CHIPS and Science Act and the Fiscal Year 2023
    omnibus appropriations bill provide funding for up to 3 new
    semiconductor-focused MUSA institutes, as well as an additional NIST-
    funded MUSA institute. More than a year later, the Department has not
    yet announced funding opportunities for new Institutes that are greatly
    needed for our Nation's competitiveness and leadership in advanced
    manufacturing. Can you share with us when the Department of Commerce is
    expected to announce the funding opportunities for both the
    semiconductor and additional MUSA institutes? What are the expected
    timelines for evaluation and award selection as well?
        Answer. The Department of Commerce is committed to helping more
    American workers compete and win in the 21st century global economy.
    NIST intends to announce a funding opportunity in Spring 2024 for a new
    Commerce Department-sponsored Manufacturing USA institute focused on
    the use of AI to improve resilience of U.S. manufacturing. The
    institute will be funded using the FY 2023 omnibus appropriations.
        In addition, in January, the Department of Commerce issued a Notice
    of Intent to announce a competition for a new CHIPS Manufacturing USA
    Institute. CHIPS for America is investing at least $200 million in this
    CHIPS Manufacturing USA Institute to create the first-of-its-kind
    digital twin institute to lead the world in revolutionizing
    semiconductor and advanced packaging manufacturing. The CHIPS
    Manufacturing USA Institute will foster a collaborative environment to
    significantly expand innovation, bring tangible benefits to both large
    and small-to-medium-sized manufacturers, strengthen diverse research
    institutions, and ensure a national reach in workforce development. The
    new institute will have both regionally focused programs and meaningful
    cross-region participation. This nationwide model will best meet the
    CHIPS R&D program goals of strengthening U.S. technology leadership,
    accelerating ideas to market, and realizing a robust semiconductor
    workforce.
        CHIPS for America expects to announce the competition for the new
    Manufacturing USA Institute via a Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)
    in the second quarter of calendar year 2024.
        Finally, NIST has issued a NOFO for Manufacturing USA Workforce,
    Education and Vibrant Ecosystems (WEAVE) public service awards to the
    17 Manufacturing USA institutes designed to engage Historically Black
    Colleges and Universities, other Minority Serving Institutions, and
    rural serving institutions of higher education. NIST has reviewed
    applications and anticipates awards will be announced in early 2024.
    Germanium and Gallium/Impacts on Semiconductors
        China restricted exports of germanium and gallium citing national
    security. China put the restrictions in place after the U.S. put new
    export controls on advanced semiconductors and semiconductor tools
    destined for China.
        Germanium is used as a transistor in thousands of electronic
    applications and in optical coatings the solar industry needs. Gallium
    is used in manufacturing semiconductors.
        China produces around 60 percent of germanium over 90 percent of
    the world's gallium. Germanium is also produced in Canada, Finland, and
    the United States. Europe, Japan, and Canada produce some gallium.

        Question 1. How is the Department of Commerce working with the
    Biden administration to ensure the private sector has access to
    supplies of germanium and gallium needed for semiconductor production?
    How are you working with like-minded allies and foreign partners to de-
    risk and strengthen supply chain resilience?

        Question 2. Could you speak more about the Department of Commerce's
    strategy to ensure a stable and resilient supply of critical materials
    for the semiconductor industry? How are you coordinating with the U.S.
    Department of State and other agencies and departments to ensure
    successful implementation of the CHIPS Act?

        Question 3. What do you need from Congress to support these
    efforts?
        Answer. The Department is working on multiple fronts to advance the
    Biden administration's priorities to support resilient and secure
    supply chains of critical minerals and metals like gallium and
    germanium. We must ensure that international trade in minerals is fair
    and that domestic mineral processing is expanded, and we should develop
    a circular economy where key minerals are extracted from end-of-life
    electronics and manufacturing scrap. Toward these ends, Commerce has
    already launched a new Industry Trade Advisory Committee on Critical
    Minerals and Non-Ferrous Metals and is working with allies through
    working groups with Australia, Brazil, Canada, the European Union, and
    Japan to engage industry. We also participate in certain United Nations
    International Metals Study Groups. Commerce is also engaging industry
    across the gallium and germanium value chain to identify key needs and
    concerns and assess impacts of foreign trade actions, as well as
    determine how gallium and germanium end-users can diversify their
    supply chains away from single sources and regions of high geopolitical
    concern.
        Recognizing the national security imperative of investments in the
    domestic semiconductor industry, the Departments of Commerce and
    Defense in July announced a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to expand
    collaboration to strengthen the U.S. semiconductor defense industrial
    base. The agreement increases information-sharing between the
    Departments to facilitate close coordination on the CHIPS for America's
    incentives programs, including collaboration on potential investment
    applications to ensure that our departments are making complementary
    decisions that maximize Federal investments under the CHIPS Incentive
    Program and the Department of Defense's (DoD) Defense Production Act
    and Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment funds. This alignment of
    priorities and decision-making will help ensure that our respective
    investments position the United States to produce semiconductor chips
    essential to national security and defense programs.
        Gallium and germanium are important examples among the critical
    minerals that the CHIPS program is focused on in partnership with the
    critical minerals team in International Trade Administration (ITA) and
    other agencies. Direct support is available to semiconductor materials
    facilities via the first and second notices of funding opportunities.
    The CHIPS office is also partnering with the leading semiconductor
    manufacturing firms to better understand and support their world class
    supply chains and business continuity programs.
        Analyzing critical supply chains to identify potential chokepoints
    before they become crises--going from reactive to proactive--is being
    prioritized. After receiving an initial $10.8 million appropriation in
    Fiscal Year 2023, the Commerce Department's Industry and Analysis (I&A)
    unit in ITA launched the U.S. Government's first Supply Chain Center to
    serve as the analytic engine for supply chain resilience policy action
    within the U.S. Government. The FY 2024 Budget Request seeks $21
    million to scale these efforts and institutionalize this important work
    within Commerce. The Supply Chain Center builds on I&A's mission to
    enhance the competitiveness of U.S. companies and protect U.S. national
    security by being: (1) proactive in getting ahead of supply chain
    challenges with analytic frameworks, deep dives, policy playbooks, and
    persistent scanning for vulnerabilities; (2) strategic in setting
    priorities for policy focus and action based on data-driven risk
    analysis; (3) a force multiplier in improving the targeting and
    effectiveness of U.S. Government investments; and (4) a partner to
    industry in building resilient supply chains and ensuring U.S.
    businesses lead the industries of the future.
        ITA is also seeking to expand SelectUSA services to coordinate
    supply chain priorities with state Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)
    attraction efforts and recruit high-value investment targets in
    alignment with supply chain strategies. The FY 2024 Budget seeks $4.75
    million for ITA to expand its investment promotion tool kit to target
    high-value investments in coordination with U.S. states, which would
    dramatically improve SelectUSA's ability to attract investment into the
    United States. In addition, ITA will conduct the analysis required to
    use the specialized expertise and firm-level data needed to develop
    better strategies for attracting specific individual firms to the
    United States. Lastly, the requested funds will bolster the Advocacy
    Center, which works the U.S. businesses to win foreign government
    public tenders, reflecting the importance of global markets to
    maintaining the viability of key domestic suppliers.
        This request is the Global Markets component of an ITA joint
    proposal with the Industry and Analysis business unit. Global Markets
    will leverage the analysis, strategies, and recommendations produced by
    Industry and Analysis under its complementary request to better target
    FDI toward reducing critical, national supply chain risks.
        The NIST Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) helps businesses
    narrow gaps in our supply chains and make manufacturing more resilient.
    NIST's Manufacturing USA program intends to make available competitive
    awards to enable existing Manufacturing USA institutes to transition
    technologies developed at the institutes into domestic production.
        Altogether, these investments in critical technologies and regions
    are essential to maintaining American technological leadership in the
    world and outcompeting the People's Republic of China (PRC) in a 21st
    century global economy.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Baldwin to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
        The Department of Commerce's March 22, 2023 preliminary
    determination in its self-initiated circumvention inquiry into imports
    of aluminum foil from South Korea and Thailand imposes substantial
    duties on thin-gauge or ``converting'' aluminum foil that is essential
    for food, pharmaceutical, and medical device packaging. I am concerned
    that these duties not meet the intent of anti-dumping measures, harming
    American manufacturers instead of protecting them.

        Question 1. Will you consider exempting thin-gauge aluminum foil in
    DOC's final determination on this issue? If not, will you consider
    providing an end-use certification exemption for flexible packaging
    manufacturers and other U.S. importers of thin-gauge aluminum foil?
        Answer. Commerce's enforcement and compliance proceedings are bound
    by statute and regulation to protect American businesses and workers
    from unfair trade. Commerce currently administers antidumping and
    countervailing duties (AD/CVD) orders on imports of aluminum foil from
    China pursuant to longstanding U.S. law designed to negate the unfair
    advantage of injurious foreign government subsidies and unfair pricing
    (i.e., dumping) of goods in the U.S. market. As part of that underlying
    investigation, the International Trade Commission determined that
    unfairly subsidized and priced imports of aluminum foil from China harm
    the U.S. domestic industry. Circumvention inquiries are a critical
    component to a robust trade enforcement regime because they ensure that
    AD/CVDs are not undermined and continue to support U.S. workers and
    businesses in the face of unfair trade. Lastly, it is important to
    clarify that Commerce is directed by law to consider only the statutory
    and regulatory factors as part of its circumvention analysis and cannot
    consider additional factors, such as other domestic industries that may
    require the product as an input. On November 20, 2023, Commerce
    announced its final determinations that imports of Chinese-sourced
    aluminum foil that are assembled or completed in Korea or Thailand are
    circumventing the AD/CVD orders on aluminum foil from China. Be assured
    that all parties' comments were fully taken into consideration for the
    final determinations, including arguments regarding the inclusion of
    thin gauge converter aluminum foil within the scope of the orders and
    certification requirements for flexible packaging manufacturers.
                                     ______

      Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
    Ally Engagement on Export Controls
        One early success in the Biden administration's efforts to protect
    national and economic interests was our agreement with Japan and the
    Netherlands to ensure those two countries adopt policies that mirror
    U.S. policies in restricting the export of chip manufacturing
    technologies to the People's Republic of China (PRC).
        Recently, however, Huawei unveiled the Mate 60 Pro smartphone,
    which uses 7 nanometer chips. This development highlights the
    importance of continuous work to improve export controls and affirms
    the importance of expanding cooperation with close allies and partners.

        Question 1. Please provide the U.S. Department of Commerce's
    assessment of the effectiveness of our Nation's current export controls
    on chip manufacturing technologies.

        Question 2. Please provide the Department's recommendations for
    actions that Congress could take to enhance the Department's ability to
    ensure the United States cooperates with partners to better counter the
    PRC's efficiency and speed in developing and adopting cutting-edge
    technologies.
        Answer. The October 7, 2022 advanced computing and semiconductor
    manufacturing equipment rule issued by the Commerce Department's Bureau
    of Industry and Security (BIS) imposed restrictions on the PRC's access
    to certain advanced semiconductor manufacturing equipment, chips and
    other items needed to develop A.I. and prohibited U.S. persons from
    supporting chip development and production that power A.I. systems at
    certain semiconductor fabrication facilities located in the PRC or
    Macau without a license.
        The rule was released as an interim final rule and is in effect.
    According to public reporting, the regulation has restricted the PRC's
    ability to indigenously produce advanced semiconductors that threaten
    U.S. national security and foreign policy interests. However, we know
    that the PRC is looking for ways to continue accessing these high-end
    chips and the equipment needed to manufacture them, and we are aware of
    public reporting regarding purported advances by a PRC company in
    certain chips. In this evolving technological landscape and threat
    environment, BIS continues to review different sources of information,
    including classified, business proprietary, and open source
    information, to understand the character and composition of any
    purported advances in PRC companies' production of certain chips,
    address circumvention attempts, and track the impact of U.S. controls
    and be proactive and nimble when new information surfaces.
        On October 17, 2023, the BIS released rules designed to update
    export controls on advanced computing semiconductors and semiconductor
    manufacturing equipment, as well as on items that support
    supercomputing applications and end-uses, to arms embargoed countries,
    including the PRC. BIS also placed additional Chinese entities on the
    Entity List for their involvement in the development of advanced
    computing integrated circuits. These rules reinforce the objective of
    the October 7, 2022, controls to restrict the PRC's ability to both
    purchase and manufacture certain high-end chips critical for military
    advantage.
        The Advanced Computing Chips Interim Final Rule retains the
    stringent PRC-wide licensing requirements imposed in the October 7,
    2022, rule and makes two categories of updates by: (1) adjusting the
    parameters that determine whether an advanced computing chip is
    restricted; and (2) imposing new measures to address risks of
    circumvention of the controls.
        The Expansion of Export Controls on Semiconductor Manufacturing
    Items Interim Final Rule: (1) imposes controls on additional types of
    semiconductor manufacturing equipment; (2) refines and better focuses
    the U.S. persons restrictions while codifying previously existing
    agency guidance, to ensure U.S. companies cannot provide support to
    advanced PRC semiconductor manufacturing, while avoiding unintended
    impacts; and (3) expands license requirements for semiconductor
    manufacturing equipment to apply to additional countries beyond the PRC
    and Macau, to 21 other countries for which the U.S. maintains an arms
    embargo.
        The third rule issued on October 17, 2023 adds to the Entity List
    two PRC entities and their subsidiaries (a total of 13 entities)
    involved in the development of advanced computing chips that have been
    found to be engaged in activities contrary to U.S. national security
    and foreign policy interests. These entities will also be subject to
    restrictions on foreign-produced items made with U.S. technology. In
    addition, foundries producing chips for these listed parties will need
    a BIS license before the foundries may send such chips to these
    entities or parties acting on behalf of these entities as a result of
    applying the ``footnote 4'' Entity List foreign direct product rule
    designation.
        In addition, as you point out, it is imperative that the United
    States and our allies safeguard our core technologies by continuously
    and proactively reviewing and updating our export control policies in
    order to protect foundational technologies. The U.S. government will
    continue to assess the national security environment and is in constant
    communication with like-minded international partners and allies
    regarding issues of mutual security concern.
        The President's FY2024 proposed budget provides BIS's Export
    Administration (EA) with the resources necessary to sustain its
    effective work across its areas of responsibility, including the
    evaluation of the families of technologies outlined by the National
    Security Advisor, as well as others.
        BIS is working to implement a reorganization of EA that will help
    to address its substantially growing responsibilities and ensure that
    the national security and economic policy priorities identified under
    Export Control Reform Act of 2018 are met effectively and
    expeditiously.
    Export Controls--Taiwan and South Korea
        South Korean and Taiwanese chipmakers are understandably reluctant
    to curb investments in China, which on purchasing power alone, is an
    important marketplace for manufacturers based in those two respective
    countries.

        Question 1. What is the U.S. Department of Commerce's long-term
    strategy to implement smart export controls that incentivize allies and
    partners, such as South Korea and Taiwan, to work with the United
    States in effectively engaging in a new era of strategic trade?

        Question 2. What specific legislative actions could Congress
    consider to strengthen the Department's ability to implement such a
    smart export control strategy?
        Answer. The Commerce Department and its interagency partners
    continue to assess the security environment and are in regular
    communication with like-minded international partners and allies
    regarding issues of mutual security concern. On October 13, 2023, BIS
    issued a rule updating the general authorizations for Samsung and SK
    hynix--companies headquartered in the Republic of Korea (ROK)--for
    their semiconductor fabrication facilities in the Peoples Republic of
    China (PRC). Samsung's and SK hynix's PRC facilities are Validated End-
    Users (VEUs), which means they can apply for, and after national
    security review and approval by the U.S. government, obtain a general
    authorization to acquire certain items rather than seeking multiple
    individual licenses.
        The rule issued on October 13, 2023, allows these companies to
    continue their operations in the PRC. The VEU authorizations reflect
    close consultations between the United States and ROK through various
    channels, including the Korea-U.S. Supply Chain and Commercial Dialogue
    (SCCD) and the SCCD Working Group on Export Controls announced in
    November 2022.
        The United States and ROK and our companies play a critical role in
    the global semiconductor supply chain and the October 13, 2023,
    announcement demonstrates the strength of our partnership and
    commitment to a secure and transparent supply chain, particularly for
    memory chips.
        These updated authorizations build on the case-by-case review
    process established in the October 7, 2022, rule imposing restrictions
    on China's access to advanced semiconductors and semiconductor
    manufacturing equipment, and related items, and reflect our ongoing
    communication on matters of mutual security interest.
        Coordination among allies is among the most critical elements to
    any successful export control regime, and we are constantly reviewing
    and refining our export controls in response to the evolving national
    security context. To that end, BIS is in constant communication with
    international allies and partners that share our democratic values,
    security, and other interests to help them understand our views on the
    current threat environment, explain our approach to export controls,
    and to enlist their assistance in aligning controls. Our national
    security interests, and the impact of our export control policies, are
    best served when we foster collaboration with our international
    partners.
    Benefits to Illinois
        The Recompete program holds the potential to help communities
    grappling with persistent economic challenges by providing critical
    resources that will enable them to become leaders in high-growth, high-
    wage sectors, such as advanced manufacturing.
        In Illinois, we're witnessing a manufacturing resurgence in Central
    Illinois, but much work remains to ensure this growth brings shared
    prosperity that reduces racial inequality and lifts all communities.
        Illinois is home to large numbers of skilled workers who are ready,
    willing, and able to adapt to work in emerging industries, but also
    struggling to address persistent inequality, especially regarding Black
    wealth and employment, make our State well-suited for the Recompete
    pilot program.

        Question 1. Please discuss the real world economic benefits that
    will result from Congress fully funding the Recompete pilot program.

        Question 2. Please describe the Economic Development
    Administration's composite of an ideal Recompete Pilot Program
    applicant.
        Answer. As part of the Department's commitment to creating good-
    paying jobs and ensuring that no community is left behind, another key
    element of the CHIPS and Science Act is the Distressed Area Recompete
    Pilot Program (Recompete), housed in the Economic Development
    Administration (EDA). Recompete targets the hardest-hit and most
    economically distressed communities where prime-age (25-54 years)
    employment is significantly lower than the national average, with the
    goal to close this gap through flexible, locally-driven investments.
    The Recompete program aims to catalyze long-term economic opportunity
    through these investments that target the unique underlying conditions
    of a particular place. Through its bottom-up, community-driven
    approach, Recompete will provide employment opportunities in
    concentrated areas. Through a two-phase competition, Recompete will
    provide transformational investments of approximately $20-$50 million
    to 4-8 communities across the country.
        The Department is grateful to Congress for the $200 million dollars
    that it received in FY23 to make transformational investments in
    distressed communities across the Nation and catalyze renewed
    competitiveness and economic opportunity for workers and families.
    However, this funding represents a fraction of the $1 billion the
    program was authorized through the CHIPS and Science Act, and it is
    dwarfed that much more by the demand for these kinds of crucial
    investments. At the closing of the Phase 1 application window in
    October 2023, the program received 565 applications, marking the
    largest number of applications of any national EDA competition to date.
    Applications represented all parts of the country--coming from 49
    states and 4 territories--and identified more than $6.6 billion in
    investment needs to tackle persistent economic distress in their
    communities. In Phase 2, Recompete will make concentrated awards in
    just 4-8 regions, meaning that many applicants that submit quality,
    thorough applications will not receive the much-needed Recompete
    investments in their persistently distressed communities.
        In December of last year, EDA announced 22 Recompete Finalists
    located across 20 states and Territories that represent a cross-section
    of urban and rural regions. Phase 2 investments will range from $20-$50
    million and can be used to support a wide range of implementation
    activities across workforce development, business and entrepreneur
    development, infrastructure, and additional planning, predevelopment,
    or technical assistance. EDA also awarded 24 Strategy Development
    Grants (SDG) to help communities significantly increase local
    coordination and planning activities. Such development could make
    selected grantees more competitive for any future Recompete funding.
        The 22 Recompete Finalists represent the top 10 percent of
    applicants from across the nation--they are working in places that on
    average, have prime-age (25-54 years) employment rates that trail the
    national average by more than 10 percentage points and an average
    median household income one-third below the national average. To combat
    long-term distress, each Finalist built a Recompete Plan that
    articulated a tailored investment thesis based on root causes, ranging
    from shifting global markets, to addiction, to economic isolation.
    These plans brought together strong public, private, and civic
    partnerships -together, Finalists submitted more than 530 letters of
    support, many of which represent specific and targeted partnerships and
    local commitments from local elected officials (116), the private
    sector (125), higher education and workforce training organizations
    (104), and community based and labor organizations (103).
        The President's FY 2025 Budget requests an additional $41 million
    for the Recompete Pilot Program. This would allow EDA to make more
    grant awards to communities that have been for too long been forgotten
    through future rounds of the program in areas like workforce training,
    small business supports, infrastructure investments, and other critical
    investments to move the needle.
    Critical Materials
        Question 1. Please share the most troubling risks that the
    Department of Commerce has identified in the critical mineral supply
    chain.

        Question 2. Please describe what steps the United States must take
    to better partner with allied countries to secure critical minerals,
    while lessening our Nation's dependence on sourcing critical minerals
    mined by firms our countries with strong ties to competitor and
    adversarial regimes, such as the PRC and the Russian Federation, since
    such sourcing often results in adverse humanitarian and national
    security costs.
        Answer. To decrease our dependence on the People's Republic of
    China (PRC) for the critical minerals we need to drive our innovative
    economy, we need bold domestic investments and to work with allied
    countries. Without access to these materials, we risk falling behind
    the PRC in the race to invent and commercialize future generations of
    technology. Diverse, resilient, and sustainable supply chains are
    critical for national security and economic competitiveness, and a key
    element of this effort is revitalizing domestic manufacturing, reducing
    our reliance on the PRC, and positioning ourselves to be proactive
    instead of reactive.
        Last year, the Commerce Department's International Trade
    Administration (ITA) established a Supply Chain Center. Housed in ITA's
    Industry and Analysis unit, the Center aims to be the analytic engine
    for supply chain resilience policy action within the U.S. Government.
    The Supply Chain Center integrates industry expertise and data
    analytics to develop innovative supply chain risk assessment tools and
    coordinate deep-dive analyses on select critical supply chains to drive
    targeted actions. The Center is proactive in getting ahead of supply
    chain challenges, strategic in setting priorities for policy focus and
    action based on data-driven risk analysis, a force multiplier in
    improving the targeting and effectiveness of U.S. Government
    investments, and a partner to industry in building resilient supply
    chains and supporting U.S. businesses to lead the industries of the
    future.
        In addition, the Department is making a wide range of contributions
    to U.S. supply chain resiliency, which include, but are not necessarily
    limited to, the following: 1) Supply Chain Data Summit: The Department,
    led by the Supply Chain Center and the Industry and Analysis unit, will
    convene a diverse array of public and private stakeholders at a Supply
    Chain Data and Analytics Summit in 2024. The event will gather expert
    input to inform supply chain risk assessment models and tools and
    facilitate expanded sharing of data and analytic capabilities; 2) CHIPS
    Notice of Funding Opportunity: Commerce, along with CHIPS for America,
    has driven action on semiconductor supply chains. On September 29,
    Commerce released a second funding opportunity to strengthen the
    resilience of the semiconductor supply chain, advance U.S. technology
    leadership, and support vibrant domestic semiconductor clusters. The
    funding opportunity seeks applications for commercial semiconductor
    materials and manufacturing equipment facilities with capital
    investments less than $300 million. It builds upon the Department's
    announcement in June 2023 expanding funding to larger supply chain
    projects. Supply chain applicants are vital to producing semiconductors
    in the United States, supporting the domestic manufacturing ecosystem,
    and creating jobs and opportunities in communities across the country;
    3) Manufacturing Extension Partnerships (MEP): Small and medium-sized
    manufacturers are vital to U.S. supply chains, and Commerce has been
    expanding its work to support them. Administered by DOC's National
    Institute of Standards and Technology, the network of MEPs works to
    drive innovation and sustainability in manufacturing and build U.S.
    manufacturing capacity at all tiers in the supply chain ecosystem. In
    June 2023, MEP awarded more than $20 million across the MEP National
    network to create the Supply Chain Optimization and Innovation Network,
    or S-COIN, which will focus on providing supplier scouting services,
    establishing new service offerings to improve existing supply chain
    networks, filling gaps in the supply chain by connecting original
    equipment manufacturers with small and medium-sized manufacturers, and
    creating a complete map of U.S. supplier capability and capacity; 4)
    Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF): The United
    States, with Commerce playing a leading role, and 13 regional partner
    nations have substantially concluded negotiations on agreements under
    IPEF related to supply chains, climate and sustainability, preventing
    and combatting corruption, and improving tax transparency and tax
    administration. In particular, the IPEF Supply Chain Agreement is a
    first-of-its-kind, innovative accord that will help build resilience
    and competitiveness into critical supply chains, and Commerce is
    kickstarting this effort through pilot projects to enhance the
    resilience of key supply chains, including those related to
    semiconductors, critical minerals, and cold chain services; and 5)
    Census Data Collection: Through the Census Open Innovations Lab (COIL),
    the Census Bureau is currently in phase 2 of the StatVentures Supply
    Chain Challenge, which seeks innovative data ideas from the public,
    industry, and academia to improve measurement of supply chains. Census
    is also developing new data and visualization tools to expand U.S.
    Government insights into manufacturing, imports/exports, movement of
    goods, sale of goods, labor supply, and more.
        We are also working with our allies and partners such as Canada and
    Australia. In October, the United States and Australia held the first
    meeting of the U.S.-Australia Critical Minerals Taskforce and convened
    a government-to-business Critical Minerals Industry Roundtable.
    Leveraging the growing economic connections between both countries, the
    Taskforce identified areas in which the U.S. and Australian governments
    can take joint action to increase investment in critical minerals
    mining and processing projects in our respective countries and enhance
    market transparency in this sector. The Taskforce also discussed how to
    support innovative research and development into efficient technologies
    and practices related to sustainable mining, enhanced mineral recovery
    from unconventional sources, and new processing methods. Through the
    Taskforce, we will deepen cooperation to deliver sustainable,
    resilient, and secure critical minerals and clean energy to the world
    and reduce global emissions, including by: (1) collaborating to map
    complementary production capacities across our respective critical
    minerals supply chain; (2) working towards mutual recognition of common
    and aligned Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) standards for
    the sector, including on labor and environmental protection; (3)
    increasing information sharing to help each country shape local
    priorities and support industry investment; and (4) enhancing
    collaboration on traceability practices for verifying provenance of
    critical minerals and commodities.
        Developing options to improve market dynamics and address non-
    market practices for critical minerals is necessary to the growth of
    our respective economies and energy sectors including through
    considering actions to increase transparency on mineral market
    transactions. Earlier this year, the United States and Canada updated
    our Joint Action Plan on Critical Minerals Cooperation. Under the Plan,
    the Departments of State, Commerce, Defense, and Energy and the U.S.
    Geological Survey will work with Canadian counterparts on increased
    information and data sharing, joint efforts to promote private sector
    engagement, coordination on research and development, and cooperation
    at multilateral fora.
        Additionally, Commerce is engaged in working groups on critical
    minerals with allies such as Brazil, the European Union, and Japan, and
    also participates in certain United Nations International Metals Study
    Groups.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Kyrsten Sinema to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
    Environmental Reviews and Categorical Exclusions
        I am grateful that you reiterated your support at the hearing for a
    bipartisan NDAA amendment I worked on with Senate colleagues that would
    streamline environment reviews under the CHIPS and Science Act.
        Relatedly, the Commerce Department through the National Institute
    of Standards and Technology (NIST) announced in September the adoption
    of 11 Department of Energy (DOE) categorical exclusions under the
    National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to help expedite review for
    semiconductor manufacturing projects that receive funding through the
    CHIPS and Science Act.

        Question 1. Can you guarantee that NIST's recently adopted DOE
    categorical exclusions will apply to all CHIPS grant applications?

        Question 2. If not, can you please provide details on how the
    applicability of NEPA categorical exclusions will work?
        Answer. The CHIPS Program Office (CPO) is taking every reasonable
    step to meet the Department's responsibilities under the National
    Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in a timely manner.
        The Department is doing everything within its power to stand up a
    fast process for issuing CHIPS incentives. As we build out American
    semiconductor manufacturing capabilities, we must also maintain basic
    environmental protections.
        Regarding categorical exclusions (CEs), CPO will determine if a CE
    can be applied to a project after a review of each individual
    application. If a proposed action falls into an available CE--that is,
    a category of action that CPO has determined normally does not
    significantly affect the quality of the human environment--CPO will
    determine if extraordinary circumstances are present. If not, or if
    significant effects can be avoided despite the presence of
    extraordinary circumstances, CPO will apply the CE. A description of
    the 11 CEs that currently are available to all Department of Commerce
    (DOC) components can be found within the notice issued by DOC at 74
    Fed. Reg. 33,204 (July 10, 2009). A description of the 11 DOE CEs that
    were recently adopted by NIST can be found within the notice issued by
    DOC at 88 Fed. Reg. 64,884 (September 20, 2023). As noted in the
    question, the Department is working to adopt relevant CEs from other
    agencies.
        Finally, on December 27, 2023, CHIPS for America published a draft
    Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) on the Federal Register
    (``Notice of Availability of Draft Programmatic Environmental
    Assessment for Modernization and Internal Expansion of Existing
    Semiconductor Fabrication Facilities Under the CHIPS Incentives
    Program''). The purpose of the PEA is to evaluate the environmental
    impacts of modernization and internal expansion projects that are
    eligible for the February 2023 CHIPS Incentives Program Commercial
    Fabrication Facilities Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO). The
    finalization of the PEA will allow CPO to complete a more streamlined
    NEPA review of these types of modernization projects. Comments must be
    received by January 25, 2024. The CHIPS Environment team is dedicated
    to creating an efficient and robust NEPA process. As detailed in the
    February 2023 NOFO, the CHIPS Program seeks to support current-
    generation and mature-node semiconductors facilities vital to our
    country's national and economic security. A streamlined environmental
    review will allow these upgrade and modernization projects to proceed
    expeditiously.
    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Coordination
        Building on permitting reform, it is also essential that the
    Commerce Department works in tandem with other Federal agencies to
    balance environmental concerns with effective implementation. For
    example, the Maricopa Association of Governments, whose municipalities
    cover a rapidly growing region of over five million people, has raised
    concerns with the Phoenix-Mesa area's attainment status under the ozone
    National Ambient Air Quality Standards. The potential impact of the
    more onerous Federal requirements or sanctions under current attainment
    status could be disastrous for continued semiconductor investment.

        Question 1. Have you spoken with EPA Administrator Regan about EPA
    standards, and proposed revisions to standards, and their potential
    effect on semiconductor investment?
        Answer. CPO spoke with EPA Administrator Regan in July, following
    the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council's letter urging
    stronger action on ozone. That letter raised questions about whether
    the EPA would lower the national ozone standards below 70 parts per
    billion (ppb). Such an action would have impacted the attainment status
    of most major metropolitan areas in the United States. Additionally,
    CPO has met with EPA staff in the New Source Review Group (NSRG) on
    several occasions. The discussion with NSRG included the application of
    General Conformity and the EPA's awareness of the semiconductor
    industry.

        Question 2. How are you working to ensure that the administration
    effectively balances the economic and national security imperatives of
    the CHIPS and Science Act with other prerogatives?
        Answer. CPO conducts a rigorous and methodical review of all
    aspects of potential recipients' applications that evaluates all the
    criteria identified in the statute as well as the evaluation criteria
    identified in the notices of funding opportunity announcements. CPO
    weighs these factors both on the merits of an individual company
    proposal as well as in the context of the broader portfolio of
    applications received by CPO. A balanced portfolio is a key objective
    of the grant program.
    National Semiconductor Technology Center (NSTC) Facilities
        In May 2023 NIST Director Locascio testified before the House
    Science Committee that NIST would not be involved in NSTC Technical
    Center site selection and will leave that up to the Board of Trustees.

        Question 1. Given that, what do you expect the process to look like
    for selecting technical centers and how will the Commerce Department
    and NIST ensure that the most advanced industry facilities and regional
    semiconductor ecosystems are considered and included in the expected
    network of NSTC Technical Centers?

        Question 2. Will the NSTC issue Requests for Proposals for each
    center, and what role will the CHIPS R&D Office have in that process?

        Question 3. How many facilities do you expect will be selected, and
    to what degree will the NSTC support them via grant awards or other
    funding mechanisms?
        Answer. As stated in the March NSTC Vision and Strategy Paper, the
    Department of Commerce intends for the NSTC to (1) support world-class
    research across the domestic ecosystem, (2) provide access to physical
    assets, and (3) include a headquarters facility and additional
    locations that leverage existing facilities.
        CHIPS Research and Development has made significant progress
    towards the objectives of the NSTC over the past year. In October 2023,
    CHIPS announced the initial Board of Trustees for the independent, non-
    profit NSTC operator once the NSTC is formally established. In
    November, CHIPS announced both the incorporation of the non-profit
    operator and the first funding agreement between the Department and
    operator, which will enable operator activities such as hiring its
    executive leadership and developing a framework and sequence for
    further operations.
        Future funding agreements to further define and fund the activities
    of the operator remain under development. The Department expects that
    the specific number, specifications, organization, and selection of
    facilities will be determined with consideration given to the research
    needs of the domestic scientific and industry community, an
    understanding of currently available infrastructure, and the desire to
    rapidly provide access to capabilities.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jacky Rosen to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
    Economic Development Programs
        The CHIPS and Science Act enacted the Regional Technology and
    Innovation Hub Program or the Tech Hubs Program and the Recompete Pilot
    Program--both of which are critical for growing and strengthening our
    workforce, innovation, and regional economies. I know in Nevada, we
    have applications pending for these grant opportunities from across our
    state. Some states will lead the way in chip manufacturing, but states
    like mine will play an important role in other parts of the
    manufacturing process like advancing innovative research and training a
    skilled workforce. EDA grants like these will ensure all states can
    help bring advanced manufacturing home.

        Question 1. As Nevada waits for the award announcements, what is
    the timeline for the first round of awards and how are you ensuring
    that economic development investments reach ALL states?

        Question 2. What outreach have you been doing to make sure
    communities know about these funding opportunities including in tribal,
    rural, and underserved communities?
        Answer. The Economic Development Administration's Regional
    Technology and Innovation Hubs (Tech Hubs) program is working to create
    regional innovation centers across the country by bringing together
    industry, higher education institutions, state and local governments,
    economic development organizations, and labor and workforce partners to
    supercharge ecosystems of innovation for technologies that are
    essential to our national security and economic competitiveness. The
    Tech Hubs program is a key part of President Biden's Investing in
    America agenda, stimulating private sector investment, creating good-
    paying jobs, revitalizing American manufacturing, and ensuring no
    community is left behind by America's economic progress.
        Through the Tech Hubs program, the Department is committed to
    strengthening economic and national security by advancing the
    capacities of regions to commercialize, manufacture, and deploy these
    technologies, guided by the following priorities: 1) making more U.S.
    regions strong competitors in the global innovation economy; 2)
    building strong communities that share in the prosperity technological
    innovations bring; 3) spurring the creation of new good jobs and other
    opportunities for workers at all skill levels; and 4) strengthening and
    increasing the resilience of the supply chains that our innovative,
    technology-centric industries rely on to stay secure and competitive.
        The Tech Hubs Program is charged with increasing American
    competitiveness in technologies that contribute to national and
    economic security. The program is also designed to identify
    geographically diverse regions with the concentration of assets,
    talent, technology innovation ecosystems, and other resources that form
    a foundation on which a region can become globally competitive in its
    selected technology area. By leveraging regional resources, ranging
    from local talent pools to physical geography, Tech Hubs is investing
    in the people, places, and technologies that will power the future of
    the American economy.
        On October 23, 2023, the President announced the winners of Phase 1
    of the Tech Hubs program, and EDA posted the Notice of Funding
    Opportunity for Phase 2. This announcement included 31 designated Tech
    Hubs across 32 states and Puerto Rico, as well as the 29 consortia that
    will receive Strategy Development Grants. The 31 designated Tech Hubs
    focus on developing and growing innovative industries in regions across
    the country, including semiconductors, clean energy, critical minerals,
    biotechnology, precision medicine, autonomy, quantum computing, and
    more. The Department is grateful to Congress for the $500 million in
    appropriations that we received in FY 2023 to catalyze investment in
    technologies critical to economic growth, national security, and job
    creation, and help communities across the country become centers of
    innovation critical to American competitiveness.
        This amount, however, represents only five percent of the $10
    billion that was authorized through the CHIPS and Science Act. At this
    funding level, EDA is only able to invest approximately $40-70 million
    in each of approximately 5-10 Hubs, while the authorization envisions
    investments of hundreds of millions and up to $1 billion in 20 or more
    Hubs across the country. Based on the level of interest EDA saw in
    Phase 1--nearly 400 applications, including nearly 200 seeking to
    compete for these large investments--demand exceeds our currently
    available funds by 100x when considering both applications received and
    maximum possible investment levels.
        While EDA implemented the program and selected the Phase 1 winners
    with geographic diversity as a core principle, including by meeting or
    exceeding statutory requirements for small and rural communities, low-
    population states, and Established Program to Stimulate Competitive
    Research (EPSCoR) states, not every deserving, high-potential applicant
    will be designated a Tech Hub or receive funding at current funding
    levels. The President's budget highlights the importance of the Tech
    Hubs program by requesting the next $4 billion of the authorized level,
    putting EDA on track to invest more funding in more Hubs through future
    rounds of the program so regions can create and implement innovation-
    based growth strategies and access the concentrated investments that
    will unlock solutions to grand challenges, equitably increase
    individual prosperity, and strengthen U.S. global competitiveness.
        Recompete. As part of the Department's commitment to creating good-
    paying jobs and ensuring that no community is left behind, another key
    element of the CHIPS and Science Act is the Distressed Area Recompete
    Pilot Program (Recompete), housed in the Economic Development
    Administration (EDA). Recompete targets the hardest-hit and most
    economically distressed communities where prime-age (25-54 years)
    employment is significantly lower than the national average, with the
    goal to close this gap through flexible, locally-driven investments.
    The Recompete program aims to catalyze long-term economic opportunity
    through these investments that target the unique underlying conditions
    of a particular place. Through its bottom-up, community-driven
    approach, Recompete will provide employment opportunities in
    concentrated areas. Through a two-phase competition, Recompete will
    provide transformational investments of approximately $20-$50 million
    to 4-8 communities across the country. The final awards will be
    announced by late summer 2024.
        The Department is grateful to Congress for the $200 million that it
    received in FY23 to make transformational investments in distressed
    communities across the Nation and catalyze renewed competitiveness and
    economic opportunity for workers and families. However, this funding
    represents a fraction of the $1 billion the program was authorized
    through the CHIPS and Science Act, and it is dwarfed that much more by
    the demand for these kinds of crucial investments. At the closing of
    the Phase 1 application window in October 2023, the program received
    565 applications, marking the largest number of applications of any
    national EDA competition to date. Applications represented all parts of
    the country--coming from 49 states and 4 territories--and identified
    more than $6.6 billion in investment needs to tackle persistent
    economic distress in their communities. In Phase 2, Recompete will make
    concentrated awards in just 4-8 regions, meaning that many applicants
    that submit quality, thorough applications will not receive the much-
    needed Recompete investments in their persistently distressed
    communities.
        In December of last year, EDA announced 22 Recompete Finalists
    located across 20 states and Territories that represent a cross-section
    of urban and rural regions. Phase 2 investments will range from $20-$50
    million and can be used to support a wide range of implementation
    activities across workforce development, business and entrepreneur
    development, infrastructure, and additional planning, predevelopment,
    or technical assistance. EDA also awarded 24 Strategy Development
    Grants (SDG) to help communities significantly increase local
    coordination and planning activities. Such development could make
    selected grantees more competitive for any future Recompete funding.
        The FY 2025 President's Budget requests an additional $41 million
    for the Recompete Pilot Program. This would allow EDA to make more
    grant awards to communities that have been for too long been forgotten
    through future rounds of the program in areas like workforce training,
    small business supports, infrastructure investments, and other critical
    investments to move the needle.
        Equity is EDA's top investment priority and embedded in the design
    of the Recompete Pilot Program, and the program intends to invest in
    economic activity in geographically diverse and persistently distressed
    communities across the country. Funding will be provided exclusively to
    distressed communities, and within these areas applicants were asked to
    demonstrate how benefits from the program would be shared equitably
    across all affected populations. Applicants were also asked to
    demonstrate how they engaged underserved communities in the upcoming
    application and planning process. EDA conducted multiple outreach
    sessions for communities across the country during the Phase 1
    application period, including stakeholders from tribal and rural
    communities, as well as community-based organizations. Finally, in the
    early stages of program design the Phase I NOFO was informed by a
    request for information (RFI) issued February 23, 2023, and Tribal
    Consultation held on March 9, 2023, both of which shaped key features
    of the competition.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ben Ray Lujan to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
        The formal CHIPS solicitation for the Commercial Facilities NOFO
    reads, ``It is generally expected that most CHIPS Direct Funding awards
    will range between 5-15 percent of project capital expenditures.''
    While this is certainly laudable for large semiconductor manufacturers
    who will have no problem securing equity or debt financing for
    projects, for many smaller applicants, this 15 percent investment by
    the CPO will not enable their business cases to close on critical
    projects. For smaller dual-use, defense-critical projects, they require
    large sums of capital to be committed early in projects, and investment
    tax credits could take several years to recoup.

        Question 1. In order to maintain the diversity of projects intended
    in the CHIPS and Science Act, do you agree that the Department of
    Commerce should consider increasing the percentage of direct funding
    investment in smaller projects if they meet all other CHIPS
    requirements?
        Answer. A diversity of project and technology types will be
    necessary to achieve the Department's program goal as laid out in the
    ``Vision for Success: Commercial Fabrication Facilities.'' As stated in
    our Commercial Fabrication Facilities Notice of Funding Opportunity
    (NOFO), the Direct Funding amount will take into account a variety of
    criteria, including the project's financial model and expected cash
    flows, the project's estimated internal rate of return, the strategic
    importance of the project to U.S. economic and national security, and
    other criteria. Ultimately, the specifics of each project--and how a
    project advances the program's strategic goals--will determine award
    size amount.

        Secretary Raimondo, thank you for your commitment to brief Congress
    on the recent Partnering to Advance Trusted and Holistic Spectrum
    Solutions (PATHSS) report submitted by the Department of Defense (DoD)
    to the Department of Commerce, as required by the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act. There's been much attention on the 3.1GHz--
    3.45 GHz electromagnetic spectrum band, particularly the sharing
    feasibility analysis your Department co-chaired with DoD.

        Question 2. Will you commit--in addition to briefing Congress--that
    the Department of Commerce will make a public summary available?

        Question 3. Commerce has the unique dual role of both to promote
    commerce in the United States, including support for non-Federal
    spectrum users, and to serve as the spectrum manager for Federal
    agencies. How does the Department intend to promote non-Federal uses of
    spectrum while ensuring that Federal systems are afforded the
    continued, reliable access to spectrum they need to perform critical
    national security missions?

        Question 4. How does the Department intend to leverage the PATHSS
    report's findings in decisions regarding the 3.1 GHz-3.45 GHz spectrum
    band, and further, the PATHSS process into future spectrum allocation
    decisions?
        Answer. The National Telecommunications and Information
    Administration (NTIA) has a dual imperative built into its statutory
    role. NTIA is both the manager of Federal spectrum resources, and the
    President's primary advisor on these issues. Given these dual roles,
    NTIA's obligation is to work with the agencies to ensure that we have
    the spectrum needed for our economic security and growth while
    protecting national security and critical Federal missions and
    capabilities. To meet this obligation, it is absolutely essential that
    bands be studied before decisions are made about repurposing.
        On September 28, 2023, the Department of Defense submitted its
    Emerging Mid-Band Radar Spectrum Sharing (EMBRSS) Feasibility
    Assessment to the Department of Commerce. The Department appreciated
    the opportunity to have provided a briefing on November 16, 2023, to
    the Committee, in conjunction with the DoD, on the contents of the
    report after it was submitted by the DoD to the Department. In
    conjunction with this briefing, DoD provided a Controlled Unclassified
    Information (CUI) version of the report to interested Committee members
    and their staff. The Department and its DoD colleagues are committed to
    working with the Committee to ensure it can perform its oversight
    functions related to the report and next steps regarding the 3.1-3.45
    GHz band.
        On November 13, 2023, Biden-Harris Administration released a
    National Spectrum Strategy identifying more than 2,700 megahertz of
    airwaves to study for innovative new uses by both the private sector
    and Federal agencies. The Strategy identifies 2,786 megahertz of
    spectrum across five spectrum bands for in-depth study to determine
    suitability for potential new uses. That is nearly double NTIA's
    initial target of 1,500 megahertz. The spectrum target includes more
    than 1,600 megahertz of midband spectrum--a frequency range in high
    demand by the wireless industry for next-generation services. The
    Biden-Harris Administration published an Implementation Plan on March
    12, 2024, to carry out the Strategy, which is envisioned as a living
    document, intended to be assessed and updated in the future as spectrum
    requirements and opportunities evolve. The Implementation Plan sets out
    the requirements for a follow-on study to the EMBRSS report. President
    Biden also released the Presidential Memorandum on Modernizing United
    States Spectrum Policy and Establishing a National Spectrum Strategy,
    which will promote a trustworthy, predictable and evidenced-based
    process for ensuring spectrum serves its highest and best use.
        The CHIPS and Science Act is going to bring critical advanced
    manufacturing and jobs to the United States. Advanced manufacturers
    have a demonstrated need for private wireless networks to improve
    savings and efficiency. In some cases, under these systems, each
    individual widget within a factory is tracked and monitored. Private
    networks also have unique benefits for reliability and security, and
    security is essential for advanced manufacturers in critical sectors
    supported by the CHIPS and Science Act. Currently, advanced
    manufacturers already utilize the Citizens Broadband Radio Service
    (CBRS) spectrum band for this type of private network. According to
    reports, TSMC is planning to deploy this type of network at the
    announced semiconductor fabrication plant in Arizona.

        Question 5. Can you discuss how private wireless technologies
    currently deployed in the CBRS band can help support new advanced
    manufacturing in the United States and why security and reliability are
    so critical for those networks?
        Answer. Citizens Broadband Radio Service (CBRS) allows for dynamic
    spectrum sharing between the Department of Defense (DoD) and commercial
    spectrum users. The DoD users have protected, prioritized use of the
    spectrum. When the government is not using the airwaves, companies and
    the public can gain access through a tiered access arrangement. This
    means the DoD can use the same spectrum for its critical missions while
    companies can use it for 5G and high-speed Internet deployment.
    According to a May 2023 report from NTIA's Institute for
    Telecommunication Sciences (ITS), CBRS is working. Researchers reviewed
    aggregated data on CBRS devices-such as cell towers- between April 1,
    2021 and January 1, 2023. They found the number of devices nationwide
    grew by 121 percent over the 21-month analysis period-an indication
    that access to the spectrum is growing. There are several commercial
    use cases, like for private networks used in modern manufacturing and
    that could also be used by industrial IoT, 5G wireless and utilities.
    The BCRS offers different tiers of spectrum access, allowing non-
    federal users varying degrees of spectrum reliability and also the
    flexibility to implement their own security within the networks.
        The CHIPS and Science Act makes a historic commitment to research
    and development in the United States. The benefits of this advanced
    technology will only extend as far as families in America have access
    to those technologies, particularly access to resilient and secure
    high-speed broadband. The Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) is the
    only permanently authorized pubic benefit program established in the
    last Congress. The Administration has rightly celebrated increasing
    participation in the Program, which along with commitments by many
    Internet Service Providers has made broadband effectively free for many
    Americans. Now, eligible households do not have to choose between
    putting food on the table, paying rent, and ensuring access to school,
    work, and loved ones. Unfortunately, the President did not request any
    additional funding for ACP in his budget even though BEAD grantees
    plans are explicitly required to participate on ACP to help connect
    low-income citizens.

        Question 6. How does the Department of Commerce expect BEAD
    grantees to meet the ACP participation requirements if the ACP runs out
    of funding, as expected in March 2024?
        Answer. The Biden-Harris Administration is committed to connecting
    everyone across America to affordable, reliable, high-speed Internet
    service, and the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) is at the heart
    of the Biden-Harris Administration's efforts to make the goal of
    Internet for All a reality. ACP is critical for the success of NTIA's
    broadband infrastructure programs because users need to be able to
    afford to get online and providers need the certainty that they will
    have customers, especially in rural and low-income communities, before
    they deploy their networks.
        Pursuant to Infrastructure Investment and Job Act (IIJA), NTIA's
    BEAD program requires that participating Internet Service Providers
    offer a low-cost option. ACP helps ensure that providers can deliver on
    this requirement in all corners of the country, and ultimately meet the
    broader goal of connecting everyone in America to affordable, reliable,
    high-speed Internet service. It is imperative that ACP is put on firm
    financial footing going forward, and the Biden-Harris Administration
    has called on Congress to provide $6 billion to extend this program.
                                     ______

      Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Raphael Warnock to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
    Regional Technology Hubs and Geographic Diversity
        The CHIPS and Science Act (P.L. 117-167) authorizes regional
    technology hub programs within various agencies, including at the
    Economic Development Administration (EDA) and National Science
    Foundation (NSF). This legislation also requires geographic diversity
    within each program.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ See, e.g., https://www.eda.gov/funding/programs/regional-
    technology-and-innovation-hubs/faq; https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2022/
    nsf22082/nsf22082.jsp.

        Question 1. How does geographic diversity in these programs
    contribute to our national security and our ability to compete on the
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    global stage?

        Question 2. How will you coordinate across agencies to ensure
    geographic diversity across all programs created under the CHIPS and
    Science Act?
        Answer. The Economic Development Administration's Regional
    Technology and Innovation Hubs (Tech Hubs) program is working to create
    regional innovation centers across the country by bringing together
    industry, higher education institutions, state and local governments,
    economic development organizations, and labor and workforce partners to
    supercharge ecosystems of innovation for technologies that are
    essential to our national security and economic competitiveness. The
    Tech Hubs program is a key part of President Biden's Investing in
    America agenda, stimulating private sector investment, creating good-
    paying jobs, revitalizing American manufacturing, and ensuring no
    community is left behind by America's economic progress.
        Through the Tech Hubs program, the Department is committed to
    strengthening economic and national security by advancing the
    capacities of regions to commercialize, manufacture, and deploy these
    technologies, guided by the following priorities: 1) making more U.S.
    regions strong competitors in the global innovation economy; 2)
    building strong communities that share in the prosperity technological
    innovations bring; 3) spurring the creation of new good jobs and other
    opportunities for workers at all skill levels; and 4) strengthening and
    increasing the resilience of the supply chains that our innovative,
    technology-centric industries rely on to stay secure and competitive.
        The Tech Hubs Program is charged with increasing American
    competitiveness in technologies that contribute to national and
    economic security. The program is also designed to identify
    geographically diverse regions with the concentration of assets,
    talent, technology innovation ecosystems, and other resources that form
    a foundation on which a region can become globally competitive in its
    selected technology area. By leveraging regional resources, ranging
    from local talent pools to physical geography, Tech Hubs is investing
    in the people, places, and technologies that will power the future of
    the American economy.
        On October 23, 2023, the President announced the winners of Phase 1
    of the Tech Hubs program, and EDA posted the Notice of Funding
    Opportunity for Phase 2. This announcement included 31 designated Tech
    Hubs across 32 states and Puerto Rico, as well as the 29 consortia that
    will receive Strategy Development Grants. The 31 designated Tech Hubs
    focus on developing and growing innovative industries in regions across
    the country, including semiconductors, clean energy, critical minerals,
    biotechnology, precision medicine, autonomy, quantum computing, and
    more. The Department is grateful to Congress for the $500 million in
    appropriations that we received in FY 2023 to catalyze investment in
    technologies critical to economic growth, national security, and job
    creation, and help communities across the country become centers of
    innovation critical to American competitiveness.
        This amount, however, represents only five percent of the $10
    billion that was authorized through the CHIPS and Science Act. At this
    funding level, EDA is only able to invest approximately $40-70 million
    in each of approximately 5-10 Hubs, while the authorization envisions
    investments of hundreds of millions and up to $1 billion in 20 or more
    Hubs across the country. Based on the level of interest EDA saw in
    Phase 1--nearly 400 applications, including nearly 200 seeking to
    compete for these large investments--demand exceeds our currently
    available funds by 100x when considering both applications received and
    maximum possible investment levels.
        While EDA implemented the program and selected the Phase 1 winners
    with geographic diversity as a core principle, including by meeting or
    exceeding statutory requirements for small and rural communities, low-
    population states, and EPSCoR states, not every deserving, high-
    potential applicant will be designated a Tech Hub or receive funding at
    current funding levels. The President's budget highlights the
    importance of the Tech Hubs program by requesting the next $4 billion
    of the authorized level, putting EDA on track to invest more funding in
    more Hubs through future rounds of the program so regions can create
    and implement innovation-based growth strategies and access the
    concentrated investments that will unlock solutions to grand
    challenges, equitably increase individual prosperity, and strengthen
    U.S. global competitiveness.
        The Department of Commerce is committed to working with relevant
    Federal agencies to implement programs authorized under the CHIPS and
    Science Act that in a way that is merit-based and represents the full
    diversity of America. The Tech Hubs Program takes a whole-of-government
    approach to supporting the tech economy and national security that
    includes identifying and providing support, guidance, and additional
    funding opportunities across the Department of Commerce and from other
    Federal agencies. EDA is also working with other Federal agencies to
    identify how their programs and place-based investments complement the
    Tech Hubs Program.
        EDA has established a Memorandum of Understanding with National
    Science Foundation and has coordinated with multiple Commerce bureaus
    and other Federal departments and agencies in its implementation of the
    Tech Hubs program and in supporting Hubs achieve growth.
    Rulemaking
        A skilled domestic workforce is critical to the success of
    investments in the CHIPS and Science Act (P.L. 117-167), including
    those in semiconductor development, information technologies,
    manufacturing, and biotechnology. Community and technical colleges are
    well positioned to respond to the relevant emerging technologies
    workforce needs by providing shorter-term, experiential or work-based
    learning for a broad population of students, including rural Americans
    and those from underrepresented backgrounds.

        Question 1. What roles do community and technical colleges play in
    addressing workplace shortages?

        Question 2. What can Congress do to help Community and Technical
    colleges strengthen their capacity to train workers in the skills
    required to succeed in high-growth, high-demand industries?
        Answer. In the one year since the CHIPS and Science Act was signed
    into law, companies have announced over $166 billion in manufacturing
    in semiconductors and electronics, and at least 50 community colleges
    in 19 states have announced new or expanded programming to help
    American workers access good-paying jobs in the semiconductor industry.
    As part of the Biden Administration's long-term vision for CHIPS for
    America, Secretary Raimondo has called on the United States to double
    the semiconductor workforce overall, for U.S. colleges and universities
    to triple the number of graduates in semiconductor-related fields, and
    for semiconductor companies to work with high schools, community
    colleges, and unions to train 100,000 new technicians. CHIPS for
    America will embrace a whole-of-society approach across government,
    education, labor unions, industry, and community organizations to
    achieve these ambitious goals.
        The Department of Commerce is committed to helping more American
    workers compete and win in the 21st century global economy. The
    National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Manufacturing
    Extension Partnership (MEP) helps businesses narrow gaps in our supply
    chains and make manufacturing more resilient.
        NIST has issued a Notice of Funding Opportunity for Manufacturing
    USA Workforce, Education and Vibrant Ecosystems (WEAVE) public service
    awards to the 17 Manufacturing USA institutes. NIST is currently
    reviewing applications and anticipates awards will be announced early
    this year.
        In Spring 2024, NIST intends to announce a funding opportunity for
    a new Commerce Department-sponsored Manufacturing USA institute. As
    with all Manufacturing USA institutes, there will be a program to
    educate and train skilled workers, working with community and technical
    colleges.
        Additionally, in January 2024, the Department of Commerce issued a
    Notice of Intent to announce a competition for a new Manufacturing USA
    Institute. CHIPS for America is investing at least $200 million in a
    CHIPS Manufacturing USA Institute to create the first-of-its-kind
    institute focused on digital twins to lead the world in revolutionizing
    semiconductor and advanced packaging manufacturing. The CHIPS
    Manufacturing USA Institute will foster a collaborative environment to
    significantly expand innovation, bring tangible benefits to both large
    and small-to-medium-sized manufacturers, strengthen diverse research
    institutions, and ensure a national reach in workforce development. The
    new institute will have both regionally focused programs and meaningful
    cross-region participation. This nationwide model will best meet the
    CHIPS R&D program goals of strengthening U.S. technology leadership,
    accelerating ideas to market, and realizing a robust semiconductor
    workforce.
        The Economic Development Administration (EDA)'s Regional Technology
    and Innovation Hubs (Tech Hubs) Program is working to create regional
    innovation centers across the country by bringing together industry,
    higher education institutions, state and local governments, economic
    development organizations, and labor and workforce partners to
    supercharge ecosystems of innovation for technologies that are
    essential to our national security and economic competitiveness. The
    Tech Hubs Program is a key part of President Biden's Investing in
    America agenda, stimulating private sector investment, creating good-
    paying jobs, revitalizing American manufacturing, and ensuring no
    community is left behind by America's economic progress.
        Through the Tech Hubs Program, the Department is committed to
    strengthening economic and national security by advancing the
    capacities of regions to commercialize, manufacture, and deploy these
    technologies, guided by the following priorities: 1) making more U.S.
    regions strong competitors in the global innovation economy; 2)
    building strong communities that share in the prosperity technological
    innovations bring; 3) spurring the creation of new good jobs and other
    opportunities for workers at all skill levels; and 4) strengthening and
    increasing the resilience of the supply chains that our innovative,
    technology-centric industries rely on to stay secure and competitive.
        The Tech Hubs Program is charged with increasing American
    competitiveness in technologies that contribute to national and
    economic security. The program is also designed to identify
    geographically diverse regions with the concentration of assets,
    talent, technology innovation ecosystems, and other resources that form
    a foundation on which a region can become globally competitive in its
    selected technology area. By leveraging regional resources, ranging
    from local talent pools to physical geography, Tech Hubs is investing
    in the people, places, and technologies that will power the future of
    the American economy.
        On October 23, 2023, the President announced the winners of Phase 1
    of the Tech Hubs program, and EDA posted the Notice of Funding
    Opportunity for Phase 2. This announcement included 31 designated Tech
    Hubs across 32 states and Puerto Rico, as well as the 29 consortia that
    will receive Strategy Development Grants. The 31 designated Tech Hubs
    focus on developing and growing innovative industries in regions across
    the country, including semiconductors, clean energy, critical minerals,
    biotechnology, precision medicine, autonomy, quantum computing, and
    more. The Department is grateful to Congress for the $500 million in
    appropriations that we received in FY 2023 to catalyze investment in
    technologies critical to economic growth, national security, and job
    creation, and help communities across the country become centers of
    innovation critical to American competitiveness.
        This amount, however, represents only five percent of the $10
    billion that was authorized through the CHIPS and Science Act. At this
    funding level, EDA is only able to invest approximately $40-70 million
    in each of approximately 5-10 Hubs, while the authorization envisions
    investments of hundreds of millions and up to $1 billion in 20 or more
    Hubs across the country. Based on the level of interest EDA saw in
    Phase 1--nearly 400 applications, including nearly 200 seeking to
    compete for these large investments--demand exceeds our currently
    available funds by 100x when considering both applications received and
    maximum possible investment levels.
        The President's budget highlights the importance of the Tech Hubs
    Program by requesting the next $4 billion of the authorized level,
    putting EDA on track to invest more funding in more Hubs through future
    rounds of the program so regions can create and implement innovation-
    based growth strategies and access the concentrated investments that
    will unlock solutions to grand challenges, equitably increase
    individual prosperity, and strengthen U.S. global competitiveness. Tech
    Hubs funding will be deployed across four categories of activities,
    including both workforce development projects and related
    infrastructure. Community and technical colleges are members of Tech
    Hubs consortia, and EDA expects that they will play a role in the
    workforce development projects of many Hubs. EDA plans to announce all
    Phase 2 awards in summer 2024.
    Spectrum Interagency Coordination
        The National Telecommunications and Information Administration
    (NTIA) is responsible for managing federally allocated spectrum and
    promoting its most efficient use.\2\ This year, the Federal
    Communications Commission (FCC)'s authority to auction spectrum
    lapsed.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ https://www.ntia.gov/category/spectrum-management
        \3\ https://www.fcc.gov/document/chairwoman-rosenworcel-expiration-
    spectrum-auction-authority

        Question 1. How should Federal agencies collaborate to maximize the
    efficient use of spectrum?
        Answer. In August 2022, the National Telecommunications and
    Information Administration (NTIA) and the Federal Communications
    Commission (FCC) announced an updated Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
    between our agencies on spectrum coordination. This was the first
    update to the MOU in nearly 20 years, and it is already paying
    dividends as the two agencies navigate complex issues together.
        A wide array of Federal agencies use spectrum effectively to
    perform critical missions in service to all Americans--from national
    defense, to weather forecasting, to scientific observation, and more.
    The NTIA has a dual imperative built into its statutory role. NTIA is
    both the manager of Federal spectrum resources and the President's
    primary advisor on spectrum-related issues. In its statutory Federal
    spectrum management role, NTIA helps ensure the efficient use of
    spectrum by tailoring frequency assignments to demonstrated agency
    spectrum requirements. Significantly, most spectrum bands with Federal
    operations are shared, accommodating access by multiple--often many--
    agencies.
        Spectrum used for Federal missions is also often shared with the
    private sector uses, and NTIA recognizes the need to make additional
    spectrum available for increased requirements. Given NTIA's dual roles,
    NTIA is focused both on ensuring that Federal agencies have the
    spectrum necessary to carry out their missions and ensuring that there
    is sufficient spectrum for private sector use to maintain U.S. global
    leadership in wireless technology and services. NTIA partners with
    Federal agencies to determine the most efficient use of spectrum, while
    also ensuring agencies have sufficient access to spectrum to support
    mission requirements. The National Spectrum Strategy, released in
    November 2023 and discussed in the response below, emphasizes a number
    of efforts related to agency collaboration and maximizing the efficient
    use of spectrum.

        Question 2. What can Congress do to facilitate better agency
    coordination around spectrum?
        Answer. On November 13, 2023, the Biden-Harris Administration
    released the National Spectrum Strategy, which 1) identifies over 2,700
    MHz of spectrum across five spectrum bands for in-depth study for
    potential new uses by both the private sector and Federal agencies, 2)
    improves the spectrum decision-making process both within the
    government and between the private sector and the public sector, 3)
    calls for research and development of new spectrum management
    technology, and 4) calls for development of a National Spectrum
    Workforce Plan. The Presidential Memorandum on Modernizing United
    States Spectrum Policy and Establishing a National Spectrum Strategy,
    also released on November 13, 2023, establishes a clear and consistent
    spectrum policy and a process for resolving spectrum-related conflicts
    effectively. Congressional support for the Administration's modernized
    spectrum policy and efforts included in the National Spectrum Strategy
    will help facilitate better agency coordination around spectrum.
    Solar Imports and Domestic Manufacturing
        Last year, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act, which makes
    substantial investments in solar energy and manufacturing. In August
    2023, the Department of Commerce determined that solar panel
    manufacturers in four Southeast Asian countries attempted to evade U.S.
    trade rules by using Chinese-sourced materials subject to tariffs
    without paying applicable duties.\4\ These countries account for nearly
    three-quarters of the solar modules imported to the United States.\5\
    It is critical to support domestic solar manufacturing capacity while
    keeping our trading partners accountable.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ https://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2023/08/
    department-commerce-issues-final-determination-circumvention-inquiries
        \5\ https://www.wusf.org/2023-08-18/the-u-s-imports-most-of-its-
    solar-panels-a-new-ruling-may-make-that-more-expensive

        Question 1. What can the Commerce Department do to support U.S.
    solar manufacturers while maintaining the supply of solar panels needed
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    to satisfy current project demands?

        Answer. The Department believes it is critical to build up the
    domestic manufacturing base required to deploy clean energy across the
    United States. The Biden-Harris Administration has prioritized
    investments that will create good-paying jobs and build secure solar
    supply chains in the U.S., including through tax credits in the
    Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) such as increased tax benefits for
    taxpayers who meet the prevailing wage and apprenticeship requirements.
    Thanks to the President's Investing in America agenda, more than 90
    Gigawatts (GW) of private-sector investments in U.S. solar
    manufacturing have been announced since the President took office, with
    about half of that coming in just the seven months since the passage of
    the IRA. America is now on track to increase domestic solar panel
    manufacturing capacity eight-fold by the end of the President's first
    term.
        Additionally, through SelectUSA, the U.S. government program housed
    within the Commerce Department which focuses on facilitating and
    promoting foreign investment into the United States, solar energy has
    been a key focus. Since the passage of the IRA, SelectUSA has
    facilitated clean tech investments into the United States worth over
    $10.2 billion.
        In May 2023, SelectUSA assisted Enel North America to choose Inola,
    Oklahoma as the location to build its new industrial-scale
    manufacturing facility for innovative, sustainable and American-made
    photovoltaic (PV) cells and modules. The factory, which is expected to
    have an annual production capacity of 3 GW, represents an initial
    investment in excess of $1 billion and is anticipated to create 1,000
    new direct permanent jobs by 2025. The project includes the potential
    for a second phase that would scale the factory to reach 6 GW of annual
    production, creating an additional 900 new direct jobs. SelectUSA also
    assisted Philadelphia Solar, a Jordanian based solar panel company that
    announced investment plans in November 2022 after passage of the IRA.
    Initial investment plans include $100 million to install a 1.2GW
    manufacturing line for U.S.-made mono-Passivated Emitter and Rear Cell
    (PERC) modules by 2024, with plans to invest in state-of-the-art cells
    production line by 2025 to support over 400 anticipated jobs. And in
    October 2022, Japanese automotive manufacturer Honda and South Korean
    Electric Vehicle (EV) battery manufacturer LG Energy Solutions
    announced a $4.2 billion investment to open a new EV battery plant and
    expand existing plants in Ohio, which is expected to create 2,527 jobs.
        The United States is also committed to building a coalition of
    allies and partners to invest in the creation of strong, independent,
    and reliable clean energy supply chains that puts the free world in
    charge of its own clean energy future. For example:

       Through the Clean Economy pillar (Pillar 3) of the Indo-
            Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF), we are
            negotiating high-standard provisions with 13 other partners
            that will help grow U.S. exports for clean energy tech and help
            ensure that partners in the region work together, rather than
            turn to the PRC for their financing and technologies.

       On May 20, 2023, the Quad (consisting of the U.S.,
            Australia, India, and Japan) announced that it will work
            together to identify and address gaps in our manufacturing
            capacity for critical clean energy materials and technologies.
            In particular, the program will focus on the supply chains for
            solar PVs, hydrogen electrolyzer, and EV battery technologies.
            Quad partners are contributing funding, technical expertise,
            and in-kind support to the supply chain assessment efforts and
            subsequent investment decisions. The Quad also established
            joint principles for clean energy supply chains.

       Also on May 20, 2023, the United States and Australia signed
            a statement of intent to advance our climate cooperation
            through the Australia-United States Climate, Critical Minerals,
            and Clean Energy Transformation Compact, including coordination
            to spur the diversification and expansion of clean energy
            supply chains.

       At the Clean Energy Ministerial, the United States co-leads
            a new initiative to foster the adoption of policies that
            transform the global solar supply chain to be more diverse,
            transparent, and environmentally and socially responsible.

        As you noted, Commerce is also entrusted with the responsibility to
    investigate allegations of unfair trade to protect American businesses
    and workers from such harmful practices. On August 18, 2023, the
    Commerce Department announced the final determinations in the
    circumvention inquiries of solar cells and modules from the People's
    Republic of China (PRC). Commerce found that certain Chinese producers
    are shipping their solar products through Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand,
    and/or Vietnam for minor processing in an attempt to avoid paying
    antidumping and countervailing duties (AD/CVD). The final determination
    affirms the preliminary findings in most respects and underscores the
    importance of rigorously enforcing trade law. Specifically, Commerce
    found that five companies were attempting to avoid the payment of U.S.
    duties by completing minor processing in third countries, and that
    three companies were not circumventing. Commerce also found that
    certain unexamined companies were circumventing.
        Pursuant to the Presidential Proclamation issued on June 6, 2022,
    and Commerce's Final Rule ``Procedures Covering Suspension of
    Liquidation, Duties and Estimated Duties in Accord With Presidential
    Proclamation 10414'', duties will not be collected on any solar module
    and cell imports from these four countries until June 2024, as long as
    the imports are consumed in the U.S. market within six months of the
    termination of the President's Proclamation. Importantly, importers
    must certify that these modules and cells are installed within that
    time frame, lest they risk possible enforcement action by Customs and
    Border Protection. This provides U.S. solar importers with sufficient
    time to adjust supply chains and ensure that sourcing is not occurring
    from companies found to be violating U.S. law. Solar cells made in one
    of the four Southeast Asian countries, even if made from wafers from
    China, that are then exported to a non-inquiry country and further
    assembled into modules or other products there, before exportation to
    the United States, are not subject to Commerce's final circumvention
    findings.
        Under U.S. law, Commerce may conduct a circumvention inquiry when
    evidence suggests that merchandise subject to an existing AD/CVD order
    is completed or assembled in third countries from parts and components
    imported from the country subject to the order. AD/CVD orders are
    designed to provide relief to the U.S. domestic industries when they
    are facing unfair competition. The Department's final determinations
    underscore Commerce's commitment to holding China accountable for its
    trade distorting actions, which undermine American industries, workers,
    and businesses.
    Long Term Effects of Semiconductor Investments
        The CHIPS and Science Act (P.L. 117-167) is making substantial
    investments in American manufacturing and research and development.

        Question 1. When do you expect funding awards to be finalized?

        Question 2. How will a project's economic and social impact (such
    as workforce development and diverse supplier commitments) affect the
    award amount?

        Question 3. How is the Commerce Department factoring the effects of
    climate change into how semiconductor manufacturing funding is
    allocated, given announced projects in the Southwest?

        Question 4. In making funding decisions, how will the Commerce
    Department consider the extent to which a company prioritizes
    investments refresh technology and re-invest in facilities?

        Question 5. The United States currently produces less than five
    percent of the world's memory chips, with many of the remaining chips
    coming from countries in Asia.\6\ How is the CHIPS Program Office
    planning to ensure that there is domestic production of memory chips so
    that the United States does not have to rely solely on overseas
    production for memory chips?
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/01/technology/us-chip-making-
    china-invest.html
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. The Department seeks to move as fast as possible with all
    funding opportunities to ensure that CHIPS funding can meet the
    pressing economic and national security needs. The Commerce
    Department's CHIPS for America program will evaluate each project
    holistically using the criteria articulated in our Notice of Funding
    Opportunities for CHIPS funds under the section 9902 Incentives
    Program, focused on commercial manufacturing facilities. Above all, the
    Department is seeking projects that advance economic and national
    security.
        On January 4, 2024, the Department announced that it has reached a
    non-binding preliminary memorandum of terms (PMT) with Microchip
    Technology Inc. to provide approximately $162 million in Federal CHIPS
    incentives to support the onshoring of the company's semiconductor
    supply chain. This investment would enable Microchip to significantly
    increase its U.S. production of microcontroller units (MCUs) and other
    specialty semiconductors built on mature-nodes critical to America's
    automotive, commercial, industrial, defense, and aerospace industries
    and create over 700 direct construction and manufacturing jobs.
        This announcement is the second PMT announcement by the Department
    under the CHIPS and Science Act. The first was announced in December
    2023--a PMT with BAE Systems Electronic Systems, a business unit of BAE
    Systems, Inc., that will provide approximately $35 million in Federal
    incentives under the CHIPS and Science Act to modernize the company's
    Microelectronics Center in Nashua, New Hampshire, which is designated
    as a Trusted Foundry by the Department of Defense. Recently, the
    Department announced that it has signed a PMT with GlobalFoundries (GF)
    to provide approximately $1.5 billion to strengthen U.S.
    competitiveness in current-generation and mature-node semiconductor
    production, and support economic and national security capabilities.
    The proposed funding would support a new state-of-the-art facility,
    significant capacity expansion, and the modernization of GF's U.S.
    manufacturing sites in New York and Vermont, which produce essential
    automotive, communications, and defense semiconductor technologies. The
    Department also announced having reached a PMT with Intel Corporation
    to provide up to $8.5 billion to support strengthening all major
    technical processes for leading-edge chips in the United States,
    including proposed investments in Arizona, New Mexico, Ohio, and
    Oregon. Additional projects are anticipated to be announced in the
    coming months.
        In the application review process, CHIPS Program Office (CPO)
    examines the risk of climate change, and a project's climate resiliency
    in two places: (1) under the Technical Feasibility section of the
    application, companies are asked to provide information on resource use
    to include water sources, project water consumption, as well as its air
    emissions and water effluent; and (2) in the Broader Impacts section of
    the application, the companies are asked to provide information
    regarding their climate resiliency plans. These responses are factored
    into the merit review scoring for these sections.
        As part of the due diligence process, CPO expands on the answers
    provided in the application to better answer the question ``How is the
    facility designed or how will the facility operate to address weather-
    and climate-related risks that may occur over the lifetime of the
    facility.'' During the due diligence process, CPO requests and examines
    any climate resiliency plans or climate risk mitigation strategies
    provided by the company.
        In addition to reviewing specific applications, CPO has also worked
    to identify potential cumulative impacts to resources vulnerable to
    climate change to ensure the overall success of semiconductor projects
    and managing their effect on the environment. As such, CPO has
    undertaken additional analysis of resource allocations in areas most
    vulnerable to climate change by engaging with state and local
    regulators and officials to better understand the impacts of the
    semiconductor projects to natural resources.
        On December 27, 2023, CHIPS for America program published a draft
    Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) on the Federal Register
    (``Notice of Availability of Draft Programmatic Environmental
    Assessment for Modernization and Internal Expansion of Existing
    Semiconductor Fabrication Facilities Under the CHIPS Incentives
    Program''). The purpose of the PEA is to evaluate the environmental
    impacts of modernization and internal expansion projects that are
    eligible for the February 2023 CHIPS Incentives Program Commercial
    Fabrication Facilities Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO). The
    finalization of the PEA will allow CPO to complete a more streamlined
    NEPA review of these types of modernization projects. Comments must be
    received by January 25, 2024. The CHIPS Environment team is dedicated
    to creating an efficient and robust NEPA process. As detailed in the
    February 2023 NOFO, the CHIPS Program seeks to support current-
    generation and mature-node semiconductors facilities vital to our
    country's national and economic security. A streamlined environmental
    review will allow these upgrade and modernization projects to proceed
    expeditiously.
        As stated in our NOFO, Direct Funding amount will take into account
    a variety of criteria, including the project's financial model and
    expected cash flows, the project's estimated internal rate of return
    (IRR), the strategic importance of the project to U.S. economic and
    national security, the extent of private investment, the risks
    associated with the project, and other criteria.
        The Department expects applicants to design their projects so that
    they avoid, minimize, and mitigate the potential for significant
    effects on the environment, and we are assisting applicants with the
    process for adhering to applicable environmental regulations.
        As outlined in the NOFO, one of the program's six Evaluation
    Criteria is ``Broader Impacts'' that includes a company's commitment to
    building domestic R&D facilities (and in participating in other major
    R&D efforts in the United States) to ensure process technology
    innovation is occurring in the United States and a sustainable
    ecosystem is being built, as well as the strength of the applicant's
    commitment to support CHIPS R&D programs such as the National
    Semiconductor Technology Center (NSTC) and National Advanced Packaging
    Manufacturing Program (NAPMP).
        As outlined in the Commerce Department's ``Vision for Success:
    Commercial Fabrication Facilities'' paper, the Department's four
    strategic objectives include:

       First, for leading edge logic, our goal is to both design
            and produce the most advanced chips here, in the United States,
            by the end of the decade. Right now, we manufacture zero of the
            world's most advanced chips on our shores. Specifically, by the
            end of the decade, the U.S. will have at least two new large-
            scale clusters of leading-edge logic fabs, with each cluster
            including multiple commercial-scale fabs, a large and skilled
            workforce, nearby suppliers, R&D facilities, and specialized
            infrastructure.

       Second, the U.S. will be home to multiple high-volume
            advanced packaging facilities. Packaging--the process of
            putting fabricated chips into containers that will ultimately
            be embedded in products--is an essential part of the
            manufacturing process, and one that will be core to new
            innovations in functionality and efficiency.

       Third, U.S.-based fabs will produce high-volume DRAM memory
            chips on economically competitive terms.

       And fourth, the U.S. will have increased its production
            capacity for the current-generation and mature chips that are
            vital to U.S. economic and national security.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Peter Welch to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
        Secretary Raimondo, as you may know, Vermont is a leader in the
    development of Radio Frequency (RF) technologies and is leading the way
    in the production of Gallium Nitrate (GaN) printed on Silicon chips, a
    new technology that provides greater power capacity for older chips. In
    fact, Vermont's largest employer is a semiconductor company called
    GlobalFoundries. GaN chips fabricated from legacy nodes play a critical
    role in our transition to 5G technologies and beyond, particularly for
    cars and smart appliances, which would burn out smaller chips or
    silicon-only chips. Unlike in the past, the production of smaller chips
    is no longer the only route to cutting-edge technology. The CHIPS and
    Science Act included $2 billion in incentives to produce mature, legacy
    node semiconductors. However, the United States is not the only country
    that is investing in onshoring semiconductor manufacturing. Many
    foreign companies and countries also dominate this space.

        Question 1. How is the Department incentivizing demand for fabless
    companies to use U.S.-made chips?

        Question 2. What is the Department doing to ensure that foreign
    competitors are not undercutting U.S. semiconductor companies?
        Answer. U.S. fabless companies are well-positioned to benefit from
    the growth in U.S. semiconductor manufacturing. The Commerce
    Department's CHIPS Program Office (CPO) is in a regular dialogue with
    customers, whose message is clear: they want supply chain resilience.
    Diversifying risk means buying chips made in the United States, and
    companies understand that this is in their best interest.
        Advancing U.S. national security is the primary objective of the
    CHIPS program. It is imperative that our investments and innovation
    benefit the American people, not our adversaries. In September 2023,
    the Commerce Department's CHIPS for America program released the final
    rule implementing the national security guardrails of the bipartisan
    CHIPS and Science Act. The rule elaborates on two core provisions of
    the statute: the first, prohibiting CHIPS funds recipients from
    expanding material semiconductor manufacturing capacity in foreign
    countries of concern for ten years; and the second, restricting
    recipients from certain joint research or technology licensing efforts
    with foreign entities of concern.
        In December 2023, the Department announced that it reached a non-
    binding preliminary memorandum of terms (PMT) with BAE Systems
    Electronic Systems, a business unit of BAE Systems, Inc., that will
    provide approximately $35 million in Federal incentives under the CHIPS
    and Science Act to modernize the company's Microelectronics Center in
    Nashua, New Hampshire, which is designated as a Trusted Foundry by the
    Department of Defense.
                                     ______

          Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ted Cruz to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
    CHIPS Application Requirements
        The Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) issued by your Department
    in March 2023 provided guidance for CHIPS Act commercial fabrication
    facility applicants that went far beyond the text of the statutory law,
    such as requiring a plan for access to child care for facility and
    construction workers; discriminating against non-union labor by
    strongly encouraging the use of project labor agreements (PLAs); and
    signaling strong support for providing paid leave, housing assistance,
    and transportation assistance to employees.

        Question 1. Of the 100+ firms that have applied for CHIPS funding,
    how many already provide on-or near-site childcare to their employees
    that, in the view of your agency, meets the recommendations articulated
    in the March NOFO? Please list the firms.
        Answer. The Department is currently evaluating applications and
    treats information submitted by applicants as confidential. To avoid
    any inadvertent disclosures and premature decisions, the Department is
    currently not disclosing how many applicants already provide on or
    near-site childcare to their employees or meet the recommendations
    articulated in the March NOFO. More information about CHIPS for
    America's commitment to protecting Confidential Business Information
    (CBI) can be found here: https://www.nist.gov/chips/handling-
    confidential-information.

        Question 2. How many firms applying for CHIPS funding already
    provide transportation assistance that, in the view of your agency,
    meets the recommendations articulated in the NOFO? Please list the
    firms.
        Answer. The Department is currently evaluating applications and
    treats information submitted by applicants as confidential. To avoid
    any inadvertent disclosures and premature decisions, the Department is
    currently not disclosing how many applicants already provide
    transportation assistance or meet the recommendations articulated in
    the March NOFO. More information about CHIPS for America's commitment
    to protecting confidential business information (CBI) can be found
    here: https://www.nist.gov/chips/handling-confidential-information.

        Question 3. How many firms applying for CHIPS funding already
    provide housing assistance that, in the view of your agency, meets the
    recommendations articulated in the NOFO? Please list the firms.
        Answer. The Department is currently evaluating applications and
    treats information submitted by applicants as confidential. To avoid
    any inadvertent disclosures and premature decisions, the Department is
    currently not disclosing how many applicants already provide housing
    assistance or meet the recommendations articulated in the March NOFO.
    More information about CHIPS for America's commitment to protecting
    confidential business information (CBI) can be found here: https://
    www.nist.gov/chips/handling-confidential-information.

        Question 4. How many firms applying for CHIPS funding already
    provide paid leave that, in the view of your agency, meets the
    recommendations articulated in the NOFO? Please list the firms.
        Answer. The Department is currently evaluating applications and
    treats information submitted by applicants as confidential. To avoid
    any inadvertent disclosures and premature decisions, the Department is
    currently not disclosing how many applicants already provide paid leave
    or meet the recommendations articulated in the March NOFO. More
    information about CHIPS for America's commitment to protecting
    confidential business information (CBI) can be found here: https://
    www.nist.gov/chips/handling-confidential-information.

        Question 5. Yes or no: Did the Commerce Department conduct any type
    of fiscal or economic analysis when it decided to add the provisions
    described above?
        a. If yes, did such analysis include how much it would cost
    chipmakers to provide these benefits to their employees?
        Answer. Recruiting, training, and retaining a large, skilled, and
    diverse workforce will be critical to strengthening the U.S.
    semiconductor ecosystem. Delivering on the program's national and
    economic security objectives demands major investments in the
    semiconductor workforce that will support good-paying jobs across the
    industry.
        Recognizing this, Congress in the CHIPS and Science Act directed
    the Department to include workforce development requirements in
    awarding semiconductor incentives. The statute requires that the
    Department issue awards only to applicants who have ``made commitments
    to worker and community investment'' including ``training and education
    benefits paid by the'' applicant and ``programs to expand employment
    opportunity for economically disadvantaged individuals.'' 15 U.S.C.
    Sec. 4652(a)(2)(B). The statute also requires funding recipients to
    ``secure[] commitments from regional educational and training entities
    and institutions of higher education to provide workforce training,''
    as well as to document and develop a strategy to meet workforce
    needs.'' 15 U.S.C. Sec. 4652(a)(2)(B). Finally, the statute explicitly
    states that CHIPS funding may be used to support workforce development.
    See 15 U.S.C. Sec. 4652(a)(4)(B).
        Consistent with this statutory mandate, the first funding
    opportunity requires applicants to submit workforce development plans
    for the workers who will operate their facilities and the construction
    workers who will build them.
        The CHIPS Program Office has released a workforce development
    planning guide that offers more details on these requirements as well
    as other workforce-related provisions in the first funding opportunity,
    including the requirement for applicants requesting direct funding over
    $150 million to submit a plan to provide their facility and
    construction workers with access to child care. A summary of key
    workforce provisions is available on the CHIPS website.

        Question 6. Yes or no: Did the Commerce Department analyze the cost
    to applicants to use 100 percent renewable energy for facility
    operations and whether this recommendation could be achieved in
    practice?
        Answer. As stated in the Notice of Funding Opportunity: CHIPS
    Incentives Program--Commercial Fabrication Facilities, all applicants
    are encouraged to make use of renewable energy to the maximum extent
    possible for operation of their projects, and applicants constructing a
    new facility for fabricating semiconductors are strongly encouraged to
    use 100 percent renewable energy for facility operations. This is a
    recommendation, not a requirement, and is only one factor among many
    considered by CPO when reviewing applications. Without knowing, for
    example, which companies will apply for financial assistance, their
    locations, or anticipated demand for energy, it would not have been
    possible for CPO to conduct a cost analysis at the time the NOFO was
    issued. CPO will work closely with each applicant to determine what is
    technologically and economically feasible in terms of implementing this
    recommendation.
    Applicant Selection Methodology
        The first tranche of CHIPS grants are expected to be announced this
    fall. Although the CHIPS Program Office (CPO) has held briefings and
    released materials about how to navigate the NOFO application process,
    it has not published its methodology for selecting applicants,
    including how heavily specific application components will be weighed.

        Question 1. Please provide a blank pre-application and full
    application for commercial fabrication facility applicants for the
    record.

        Question 2. What is your agency's methodology for selecting
    successful applicants? Please provide the metrics or points system that
    informs the CPO's selection process, and describe how the CPO developed
    this methodology.

        Question 3. How are you weighting March NOFO application components
    that were not included in the CHIPS and Science Act (e.g., plans for
    workforce development and childcare services, and NEPA review) against
    other application components, such as finances and feasibility? Please
    describe.
        Answer. Applicants can find information on how to complete the pre-
    application and application--as well as several resources, including
    webinars and template financial models--on the website. The pre-
    application and application consist of structured data in the
    application web portal and the questions that can be found in the CHIPS
    Incentives Program--Commercial Fabrication Facilities, Notice of
    Funding Opportunity (NOFO) issued on February 28, 2023. There is
    accordingly no ``blank pre-application and full application.''
        CPO undertakes a rigorous application review process to select
    successful applicants. CPO conducts a merit review process assessing
    whether projects are eligible for the CHIPS Incentives Program and the
    strengths and weaknesses of projects against the six criteria listed
    below. The evaluation will be qualitative, not numerical. The first
    criterion--the extent to which the application addresses the program's
    economic and national security objectives is of primary importance and
    receives the greatest weight. The remaining five criteria will receive
    approximately equal weight. Applications will only be recommended for
    award if each criterion is adequately addressed in the application
    materials. If an application is deficient in one or more areas, the
    applicant may be requested to make certain revisions in order to
    continue in the review and selection process.

      (1)  Economic security objectives will assess how an application
            advances security by building sustainable domestic capacity
            that reduces U.S. reliance on vulnerable or overly concentrated
            production.

      (2)  National security objectives will assess whether applicants
            address national security considerations, including by securing
            supply chains for technologies used by government organizations
            and their contractors. In addition, it will assess a project's
            operational vulnerabilities and resilience to threats from
            foreign entities of concern.

      (3)  Commercial viability addresses the project's long-term
            commercial viability to ensure there is a reasonable market
            environment and demand for the project's output.

      (4)  Financial strength addresses the project's financial strength
            and its ability to withstand stress in market downturn
            conditions.

      (5)  Technical Feasibility and Readiness addresses the feasibility of
            execution of the project from construction to ongoing
            operational execution and maintenance.

      (6)  Broader Impacts addresses the degree to which the proposed
            project will provide broader public impacts.

        The prioritization and selection factors for selecting applications
    for funding are below and all citations refer to the Notice of Funding
    Opportunity. The Department will give significant primary weight to the
    first factor in prioritizing applications in the review and selection
    process.

      (a)  Contribution to economic and national security, consistent with
            strategic goals described in Section I.C.1 and the evaluation
            criteria described in Section V.A.1

      (b)  Efficient use of taxpayer dollars, as described in Section I.C.3
            and the evaluation criteria in Section V.A.3

      (c)  Creation of broader impacts, consistent with the description in
            Section I.C.6 and the evaluation criteria in Section V.A.6

      (d)  Extent to which the applicant is prepared to proceed to
            execution

      (e)  Whether the project will produce chips for critical
            infrastructure

      (f)  Whether the applicant, or a corporate affiliate of the
            applicant, has previously received financial assistance in this
            program

      (g)  Whether the project duplicates other projects funded by the
            Department or other Federal agencies

      (h)  Diversity of awards in the program, including based on
            geographic location of facilities receiving support and the
            size of awards.
    Small-Scale NOFO
        In September, the CPO released a long-awaited NOFO tailored for
    small businesses and small-scale projects. During a briefing to
    Congressional staff, a member of CPO indicated that the team is not
    prepared to provide thousands of grants to smaller companies, and
    ``strongly encouraged'' applicants to apply as a consortium. These
    consortia may include groups that would not normally qualify for CHIPS
    funding, such as ``workforce training providers, labor unions, economic
    development corporations, institutions of higher education,
    philanthropic foundations, industry organizations, Tech Hubs, or other
    relevant entities.'' \1\ Requiring smaller companies to develop
    consortia to be competitive in the application process places an undue
    burden on parts of the semiconductor supply chain that the CHIPS Act
    was intended to strengthen.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ See ``Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO): CHIPS Incentives
    Program--Facilities for Semiconductor Materials and Manufacturing
    Equipment,'' https://www.nist.gov/system/files/
    documents/2023/09/29/
    CHIPS%20$20Facilities%20for$20Semiconductor%20Materials%20and
    %20Manufacturing%20 Equipment%20NOFO.pdf

        Question 1. Please describe how the CPO decided which organizations
    should be represented in a consortium.
        Answer. The Commerce Department's CHIPS Program Office's second
    Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), released September 29, 2023,
    seeks applications for smaller-scale projects involving the
    construction, expansion, or modernization of semiconductor materials
    and manufacturing equipment facilities for which the capital investment
    falls below $300 million. These applicants play a vital role in
    producing the inputs necessary for producing semiconductors in the
    United States, support our domestic manufacturing ecosystem, and create
    jobs and opportunities in communities across the country. These
    projects will produce the equipment, chemicals, gases, and other
    materials that are critical to manufacturing semiconductors in America.
        The Department will seek applications that advance any of the three
    goals outlined in the Vision for Success. For projects advancing the
    third goal--supporting vibrant U.S. fab clusters--the Department
    encourages suppliers to consider applying as part of a consortium that
    promotes the development and sustainability of semiconductor clusters.
        The Department has defined a cluster as a geographically compact
    area with multiple commercial-scale fabs owned and operated by one or
    more companies; a large, diverse, and skilled workforce; nearby
    suppliers to the semiconductor industry; R&D facilities; utilities; and
    specialized infrastructure, such as chemical processing and water
    treatment facilities. This is the kind of regional semiconductor
    ecosystem the Department aims to create in support of long-term U.S.
    competitiveness.
        For the purposes of the second notice of funding opportunity,
    applicants that claim to support clusters are strongly encouraged to
    consider applying as part of a consortium. Although consortia are
    strongly encouraged for cluster-focused applications, the Department
    welcomes applications for standalone projects that meaningfully advance
    any of the three strategic objectives outlined above.
        Applying as a consortium can be beneficial in several ways. For
    instance, by applying as a consortium, entities can work together to
    meet some of the eligibility requirements of the statute (including,
    for example, workforce strategy and community investments).
        Given the applicants for the supply chain NOFO are smaller entities
    with smaller projects, the application process is designed to be much
    simpler and more streamlined. Applicants will fill in a Concept Plan--a
    very streamlined version of the pre-application--and then be asked by
    invitation only to participate in the full application phase. The
    information CPO will request will be much less intensive than in the
    first NOFO, including more streamlined financial information.
    CHIPS for America Partner Teaming List
        In June 2023, the CPO announced the CHIPS for America Partner
    Teaming List. This list is geared toward the ``many entities interested
    in supporting the CHIPS Act that may not be eligible to apply on their
    own,'' \2\ including childcare providers and labor unions. In addition
    to providing CHIPS funding to entities the Act did not intend to fund,
    the Teaming List does not appear to be properly managed. Available on
    CHIPS's website, the List is an Excel spreadsheet; the CPO further
    states it is not ``endorsing, sponsoring, or otherwise evaluating the
    qualifications of the entities and organizations that have self-
    identified for placement on the list.'' \3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ See ``CHIPS for America Teaming Partner List,'' NIST, https://
    www.nist.gov/chips/chips-america-teaming-partner-list
        \3\ Ibid.

        Question 1. How is the CPO vetting the companies and entities that
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    appear on the Teaming List?

        Question 2. Have any companies or entities been removed from, or
    denied listing on, the Teaming List? If so, please list which ones and
    why.

        Question 3. Please describe the CPO's decision-making process to
    create a teaming list for entities that do not qualify for CHIPS
    funding versus those that do.

        Question 4. Did you perform a cyber risk assessment regarding the
    use of an unvetted Excel sheet? For example, what happens if a listed
    company is not transparent about its funding sources or offerings, and
    a smaller company unknowingly partners with them on a small-scale NOFO
    application, per the recommendation of the CHIPS Program Office?

        Question 5. How is the CPO vetting the companies and entities that
    appear on the Teaming List?

        Question 6. Is the CPO regularly checking the excel spreadsheet for
    cybersecurity vulnerabilities, such as malware?

        Question 7. Please describe the CPO's decision-making process to
    create a teaming list for entities that do not qualify for CHIPS
    funding versus those that do.
        Answer. CHIPS for America made available a teaming partner list
    that will enable entities to share information, foster collaboration,
    and advance shared goals. This list allows entities to share their
    contact information and capabilities so that potential applicants can
    reach out and consider utilizing their expertise to advance the CHIPS
    Act's objectives. Teaming partner lists are common across the
    government and used at the Department of Energy, as an example. As
    stated on the website, CPO ``does not evaluate the qualifications of
    the entities and organizations that have self-identified for placement
    on the list.'' CPO encourages ``entities seeing to utilize the list []
    to conduct their own due diligence of any entity they contact.''
        Since there are many entities interested in supporting the
    objectives of the CHIPS Act that may not be eligible to apply on their
    own, the Department of Commerce is making it easier to facilitate
    potential partnerships and collaboration that can advance economic and
    national security interests.
        This list includes businesses that may not qualify as covered
    entities under the CHIPS funding opportunities, as well as
    organizations that provide support services relevant to the execution
    of the CHIPS incentives program. These entities can include educational
    and workforce training providers; childcare providers; organizations
    that engage or support minority-owned, women-owned, and veteran-owned
    businesses; community-based organizations; labor unions; and others.
    This list does not directly connect entities to potential applicants,
    but enables external entities to explore potential strategic
    partnerships.
    CHIPS Program Accountability
        In your September 19 testimony before the House Committee on
    Science, Space, and Technology, you said, ``I think that the five-year
    mark is [a] really important mark, because it's the time that you know,
    these fabs should be coming online. And we should be making these chips
    at scale.'' \4\ Although the United States cannot build manufacturing
    capacity overnight, five years is a long time to see results,
    especially when China is heavily investing in its semiconductor
    industry.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ See ``Full Committee Hearing--CHIPS on the Table: A one year
    review of the CHIPS and Science Act,'' House Committee on Science,
    Space, and Technology, https://science.house.gov/2023/9/chips-on-the-
    table-a-one-year-review-of-the-chips-and-science-act

        Question 1. What measures of success or milestones have you
    developed that demonstrate we are strengthening supply chain resiliency
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    before the five-year mark?

        Question 2. What benchmarks are in place to ensure that the
    Commerce Department will not request additional funds to meet the CHIPS
    program's objectives? If none exist, please describe which projects the
    United States should prioritize first to meet economic and national
    security objectives.
        Answer. So many of our defense capabilities--like hypersonic
    weapons, drones, and satellites--depend on a supply of chips that are
    not currently produced in America. In 2021, car prices increased nearly
    30 percent and were responsible for a third of core inflation--all
    because we did not have enough chips. In 2022, because Ford did not
    have access to enough chips--even for simple parts like windshield
    wipers--their workers in places like Michigan and Indiana only worked a
    full week three times. The chip shortage meant medical device makers
    did not have enough chips to produce life-saving products like
    pacemakers and insulin pumps. Without manufacturing strength in the
    United States, and the innovation that flows from it, we are at a clear
    disadvantage in the race to invent and commercialize future generations
    of technology. The CHIPS and Science Act allocated $39 billion for
    manufacturing incentives to encourage companies to build and expand.
        As outlined in the Commerce Department's ``Vision for Success:
    Commercial Fabrication Facilities'' paper, the Department's four
    strategic objectives include:

       First, for leading edge logic, our goal is to both design
            and produce the most advanced chips here, in the United States,
            by the end of the decade. Right now, we manufacture zero of the
            world's most advanced chips on our shores. Specifically, by the
            end of the decade, the United States will have at least two new
            large-scale clusters of leading-edge logic fabs, with each
            cluster including multiple commercial-scale fabs, a large and
            skilled workforce, nearby suppliers, R&D facilities, and
            specialized infrastructure.

       Second, the United States will be home to multiple high-
            volume advanced packaging facilities. Packaging-the process of
            putting fabricated chips into containers that will ultimately
            be embedded in products-is an essential part of the
            manufacturing process, and one that will be core to new
            innovations in functionality and efficiency.

       Third, U.S.-based fabs will produce high-volume DRAM memory
            chips on economically competitive terms.

       And fourth, the United States will have increased its
            production capacity for the current-generation and mature chips
            that are vital to U.S. economic and national security.

        The Department currently assesses that it has sufficient
    appropriations to meet the economic and national security objectives of
    the CHIPS program.
    DOD Tech Hub Coordination
        Last month, the Defense Department (DOD) announced $240 million in
    funding for eight new semiconductor ``Tech Hubs.'' The Commerce
    Department is in the process of designating at least 20 of its own Tech
    Hubs. While all DOD Tech Hubs are funded, it is not a guarantee that
    all DOC Tech Hubs will receive funding.

        Question 1. Please describe the coordination process between DOD
    and the Commerce Department to select these initial hubs.

        Question 2. How will DOC ensure there is not program duplication?

        Question 3. Since DOD's hubs will also serve commercial aims, how
    is your agency coordinating with DOD to ensure national security goals
    are met and taxpayer dollars are spent judiciously?

        Question 4. As the Commerce Department selects its Tech Hubs, is
    the location of DOD-funded Hubs under consideration?
        Answer. On October 23, 2023, the Department of Commerce's Economic
    Development Administration, announced the designation of 31 Tech Hubs
    in regions across the country. This economic development initiative is
    designed to drive regional innovation and create jobs by strengthening
    a region's capacity to manufacture, commercialize, and deploy
    technology.
        The Tech Hubs program will help develop and grow innovative
    industries in diverse regions across the country in a broad array of
    industries that include not only semiconductors but also clean energy,
    critical minerals, biotechnology, and others. Tech Hubs will bring the
    benefits and opportunities of scientific and technological innovation
    to communities across the country, with nearly three-quarters
    benefiting small or rural areas and more than three-fourths benefiting
    historically underserved communities. They bring together private
    industry, state and local governments, institutions of higher
    education, labor unions, Tribal communities, nonprofits, and more to
    compete for implementation grants of approximately $40-70 million to
    further develop these fields and make transformative investments in
    innovative industries.
        EDA has and will continue to coordinate across the Department of
    Defense, including with its Office of Strategic Capital and its Defense
    Innovation Unit, in its implementation of the Tech Hubs program. The
    Tech Hubs program takes a whole-of-government approach to growing
    economies and strengthening national security through technology and
    innovation. EDA has designed its Tech Hubs funding to consider and
    evaluate other Federal investments, including DOD's Microelectronics
    Commons Hubs, in its application review to identify complementary,
    aligned co-investments and avoid any duplication.
    Export Controls and CHIPS Program National Security Guardrails
        The recently updated October 7th semiconductor export controls and
    CHIPS program national security guardrails share the same goal: Slowing
    down China's technological development.

        Question 1. What steps are the Departments of Commerce and Treasury
    taking to ensure that these two tools are aligned and that each are
    fully enforced?

        Question 2. Did you take the CHIPS program national security
    guardrails into account when developing the final export control rule?
    If so, how?
        Answer. The Department of Commerce has designed the national
    security guardrails on CHIPS investments to complement export controls
    on advanced computing semiconductors, semiconductor manufacturing
    equipment, and supercomputing items to countries of concern. Both
    export controls and the guardrails are designed to protect national
    security. The guardrails apply to the expansion of certain
    manufacturing capacity in the People's Republic of China (PRC) by CHIPS
    recipients. Export controls are focused on limiting access to specific
    technologies and specific end-users rather than on manufacturing
    capacity.
        BIS and the CHIPS Program Office coordinated on the development of
    the guardrails, which were designed to prevent most future investment
    in countries of concern by CHIPS recipients, and to allow existing
    facilities to continue viably operating to avoid disrupting existing
    supply chains, consistent with any applicable U.S. export control
    regulations.
        Specifically, the final rule implementing the CHIPS guardrails
    refer to restrictions outlined in BIS's rules, and also take into
    account the technology thresholds set forth in BIS's restrictions on
    advanced semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturing equipment
    released in October 2022, and subsequently updated in October 2023.
    Together, export controls and the proposed national security guardrails
    help protect U.S. investments in technology, which will advance the
    national security of the United States and our allies.
    CHIPS Act Section 48D Rule
        The CHIPS Act added Section 48D to the Internal Revenue Code to
    incentivize the manufacture of semiconductors and semiconductor
    manufacturing equipment. Though the Treasury Department has not
    released its final rule, it has signaled it intends to restrict these
    tax incentives in a way that would make companies, such as materials
    manufacturers, that are eligible for Commerce Department CHIPS grants
    ineligible for Treasury incentives.

        Question 1. Did the Commerce Department coordinate with the
    Treasury Department on its proposed definitions on entities eligible
    for Treasury Department tax incentives? Why are the definitions used by
    these agencies so different?
        Answer. Commerce and Treasury are coordinating closely on the
    investment tax credit (ITC) to ensure that incentives are complementary
    and advance our shared economic and national security goals. The
    Treasury Department is in the lead of implementing the CHIPS investment
    tax credit (ITC) and continues working to publish its final rule.
    Government Transparency
        The Executive Branch is required to provide data and regularly
    report to Congress to facilitate the legislative branch's oversight
    responsibilities.

        Question 1. What data from CHIPS grants applications does the CPO
    intend to provide to Congress?

        Question 2. What information will the CPO make available to the
    general public?

        a. What data will be provided for USASpending.gov?
        Answer. The Department considers the submission of Statements of
    Interest (SOIs), pre-applications, or applications and the identities
    of applicants as confidential business information (CBI). More
    information about CHIPS for America's commitment to protecting CBI can
    be found here: https://www.nist.gov/chips/handling-confidential-
    information.
    CHIPS National Security Guardrails
        In September, the Commerce Department released the final CHIPS
    guardrails rule, which is intended to limit the use of CHIPS funding
    for investments in countries of concern like China (88 FR 17439). The
    announcement accompanying the final rule states that it ``prohibits
    recipients of CHIPS incentives funds from using the funds to construct,
    modify, or improve a semiconductor facility outside of the United
    States.'' \5\ However, it appears that the final rule does not
    explicitly prohibit CHIPS Act funding recipients from investing in new
    facilities, meaning that the Clawbacks would only apply to the
    ``material expansion'' of existing facilities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ See ``Biden-Harris Administration Announces Final National
    Security Guardrails for CHIPS for America Incentives Program,'' U.S.
    Department of Commerce, https://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/
    2023/09/biden-harris-administration-announces-final-national-security

        Question 1. Yes or no: Will new facilities be subject to the
    Clawbacks in the final rule?
        Answer. The national security guardrails on CHIPS investments apply
    to significant transactions that involve the material expansion of
    semiconductor manufacturing in foreign countries of concern. The intent
    of the rule is to capture both existing and new construction of
    semiconductor manufacturing facilities.
    Rice's Whales Rule Impact on Safety, Security, and the Economy
        In August, NOAA entered into a stipulated settlement with
    environmental groups to remove millions of acres from future oil and
    gas leasing offshore of Texas, Louisiana, and the Gulf Coast to
    allegedly protect the Rice's whales. While the courts have temporarily
    paused these actions, NOAA is currently taking comments on the creation
    of a critical habitat area encompassing 28,000 square miles of Gulf of
    Mexico--an area larger than the entire state of West Virginia.
        NOAA used a study that has not gone through peer-review as the
    rationale for much of the area being considered, and in large portions
    of the proposed area, no whale has ever been detected. NOAA estimates
    the total cost to the oil and gas industry, recreational and commercial
    fishing sectors, and the military, for consultations under the
    Endangered Species Act for this enormous area, will come to $24,000 per
    year--which is a ludicrous conclusion. Worse, the closed area overlaps
    with military testing grounds, and the impacts to these are barely
    mentioned, much less analyzed.

        Question 1. Can you commit that you will review this proposed rule
    and, if (1) the science it is based on is not peer reviewed, (2) no
    whale has ever been detected in large portions of the designated area,
    and (3) the economic data is flawed, that you will consider withdrawing
    this rule to better account for science and reality?
        Answer. NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is
    reviewing more than 41,000 public comments received on the proposed
    rule during the extended 74-day comment period, which closed on October
    6, 2023. It would be premature to commit to withdrawing the proposed
    rule prior to giving full consideration to the large number of comments
    received from all parties. However, NMFS is committed to ensuring that
    any designation of Rice's whale critical habitat is based on the best
    scientific and commercial data available, after taking into
    consideration economic, national security, and any other relevant
    impacts. Peer review comments on the Critical Habitat Report informing
    the designation are available on NMFS's website at https://
    www.noaa.gov/information-technology/endangered-species-act-critical-
    habitat-report-rices-whale-id452. And the studies referenced in the
    Critical Habitat Report, and relied on in support of the proposed
    designation, have undergone separate peer reviews. While the Garrison
    et al., (in review) study has not yet been published, the habitat
    model, the underlying data and the associated model documentation were
    published in two technical reports (Rappucci et al 2023, Garrison et al
    2023), both of which underwent internal peer-review and are publicly
    available. The model results are also available for download from the
    National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI GoMMAPPS) and on
    the Cetacean Density Mapper.
        Sightings of Rice's whales are uncommon because the animal is among
    the rarest on the planet; however, Rice's whales have been documented
    visually and acoustically throughout the proposed critical habitat
    area, offshore of Texas, Louisiana, and Florida. The majority of
    sightings and acoustic detections have occurred along the Gulf of
    Mexico shelf break in waters 100-400 meters deep where their prey is
    most abundant, which corresponds with the proposed critical habitat
    boundaries. This past summer, there were two sightings of Rice's whales
    in the western Gulf within approximately 100 miles off of Galveston
    Texas. Rice's whales in the western Gulf have distinctive calls and
    passive acoustic monitoring has confirmed year round presence of Rice's
    whales in the western Gulf (heard every month of the year), with them
    being heard an average of one day per week.
        The economic analysis supporting the proposed critical habitat
    designation is contained in the Endangered Species Act (ESA) Critical
    Habitat Report. Economic impacts of critical habitat designations
    primarily occur through implementation of section 7 of the ESA during
    consultations with Federal agencies to ensure their proposed actions
    are not likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. The
    analysis concludes that the proposed designation is not anticipated to
    result in incremental project modifications beyond those that would
    already occur absent designation. As a result, the economic impacts are
    limited to the incremental administrative costs of considering effects
    to Rice's whale critical habitat in section 7 consultations that would
    occur absent the designation. Any activities occurring within the area
    of the proposed designation that may affect the habitat for the Rice's
    whale are already required to undergo Section 7 consultation. We
    estimate the costs associated with the incremental administrative
    effort required for section 7 consultations to consider effects to
    Rice's whale critical habitat are approximately $240,000 over the next
    10 years (discounted at 7 percent), or $37,000 in annualized costs (in
    2022 dollars). NMFS's assessment of economic impacts of critical
    habitat designation followed a well-established process, which is
    summarized in the Critical Habitat Report, as informed by NMFS's ESA
    4(b)(2) Policy (81 FR 7226).
    Hurricane Hunter Preparedness
        In late August all three of NOAA's hurricane hunters were grounded
    for repairs as Hurricane Idalia made landfall in Florida. Not only were
    all three planes grounded, but one crew had been flying back-to-back
    missions for 11 out of 12 days leading up to the hurricane. Flying
    through a hurricane is hard on both the plane and the crew. Flying this
    schedule is a recipe for failure, either of the plane or the crew
    members due to exhaustion. In an interview on Meet the Press, you said
    that that the cause of the planes going down ``was routine
    maintenance.'' However, it was four days after the hurricane before any
    of the planes were ready to fly again--four days in which another
    hurricane could have very well been approaching Texas.

        Question 1. Was this in fact routine maintenance, and if so, why
    was routine maintenance done during the height of hurricane season?
        Answer. On August 16th, NOAA 42 WP-3D (NOAA 42) aircraft
    experienced a fuel leak in one of its wings, which resulted in
    necessary maintenance and prevented the aircraft from completing its
    final hurricane mission. Due to the urgency of the maintenance, the
    aircraft was flown to Waco, Texas where required outside vendors
    completed the repair. This maintenance was completed and accepted on
    September 6, 2023.
        Because of the maintenance on NOAA 42, NOAA 43 WP-3D (NOAA 43)
    aircraft began flying twice per day using both flight crews to fully
    support the Idalia hurricane tasking during the latter half of August.
    After completing five flights out of Fort Lauderdale into Idalia, NOAA
    43's generator malfunctioned causing the crew to complete onsite
    maintenance and cancel their final planned flight.
        NOAA 49 Gulfstream-IV aircraft continued two flights per day
    throughout the storm series until August 28th when it experienced a
    failure to the pitch trim system, which is critical to keeping the
    plane level during flight especially at high speeds and altitudes.
    Fortunately, this was their final planned flight as the storm was close
    to making landfall and additional surveillance data was not requested.
    This maintenance issue did not result in any missed data collection and
    did not impact the forecast.

        Question 2. If it wasn't routine, and was because the planes flew
    for two weeks through the most extreme weather imaginable, what is the
    Department of Commerce's plan to provide sufficient back-up to allow
    for these emergency repairs?
        Answer. Based on the 2022 NOAA Aircraft Plan, Building and
    Sustaining NOAA's 21st Century Fleet, NOAA is modifying one G-550
    aircraft and negotiating the option for a second G-550. NOAA also
    procured pre-production spots for two C-130Js, and expects to award the
    production contract for two green C-130Js later this year. The
    Administration also requested $600 million in the domestic disaster
    supplemental, which would complete the two green aircraft and fund
    another fully equipped C-130J, and avoid a gap in coverage. With this
    modernized and expanded fleet, NOAA will have critical backup
    capabilities to ensure continuous observations of storms. These
    aircraft are critical to tracking ever more challenging storm
    forecasts, as we just saw with Hurricane Otis's rapid intensification
    from a Tropical Storm to a Category 5 hurricane in 24 hours prior to
    its landfall in Mexico.

        Question 3. Additionally, it's been learned that NOAA pilots have
    had to get waivers to allow them to fly after maxing out their allotted
    flight hours. Is there a plan in place to ensure that there are enough
    pilots to fly these missions without the need for waivers?
        Answer. NOAA has made great strides in growing its NOAA Corps pilot
    workforce, and the FY 2025 President's Budget is a critical step to
    addressing that. The FY 2025 President's Budget request includes an
    increase of $22.9M to allow NOAA Corps to grow from an average annual
    strength of approximately 330in FY 2024 to approximately 374 in FY
    2025. This includes growing the pilot workforce from 70 NOAA Corps
    aviator billets at the end of FY 2023 to 87 NOAA Corps aviator billets
    by the end of FY 2025. In FY 2024, NOAA's Office of Marine and Aviation
    Operations has six planned interservice transfers and six of the 22
    officer candidates in the January 2024 Basic Officer Training Course
    are being assigned to aircraft. Hiring pre-qualified aviators allows
    NOAA to deploy these pilots in a few months instead of years, providing
    necessary staffing and reducing the use of high-time waivers. Fully
    staffing all of NOAA's aircraft will require a multi-year investment
    and recruitment effort to attract and retain the best pilots for vital
    missions like hurricane forecasting.

        Question 4. During the same interview, it was reported, ``we do
    need more resources. . .and we will continue to ask for more
    resources.'' However, the Biden budget request included $0 for
    hurricane hunter aircraft, but millions of dollars for woke
    initiatives. What is the justification for prioritizing ``diverse
    fisheries'' over the millions of lives that are at risk if hurricane
    forecasting is not done right?
        Answer. NOAA recently awarded a pre-production contract, with funds
    provided in FY 2023, to secure two spots in the production line and
    purchase long lead materials for two C-130J aircraft. NOAA expects to
    award the production contract for these two green C-130Js later this
    year. The Administration also requested $600 million in the domestic
    disaster supplemental, which would complete the two green aircraft and
    fund another fully equipped C-130J, and avoid a gap in coverage.

        Question 5. Can the Commerce Department commit to ensure NOAA is
    able to meet its core mission of protecting human lives and property in
    the future?
        Answer. The Department believes that it would be unacceptable to
    allow lapses in coverage of the NOAA hurricane hunters mission to
    protect life and property, and the Department is committed to the
    acquisition of new aircraft with the support of Congress, which
    provided $327 million in supplemental Fiscal Year (FY) 2023
    appropriations as requested by the Administration. Consistent with the
    Administration's request for $600 million in the domestic supplemental,
    the Department intends to have new aircraft online in 2030 when the
    current generation will go out of service. In addition to improvements
    in hurricane forecasts, the Department has continued to invest in
    improving forecasts of other high impact events: atmospheric rivers,
    wildfires, and tornadoes.
        The Department also intends to continue to work closely with the
    U.S. Air Force (USAF) with whom NOAA shares the hurricane hunter
    mission; NOAA and the USAF have a combined fleet of 13 hurricane
    hunters to carry out critical flights that protect life and property.
    The Department welcomes the opportunity to continue working with
    Congress to ensure resources are available to meet this essential
    mission to protect life and property.
    Port Everglades
        Regarding the project to deepen and widen Port Everglades, Florida,
    on which NOAA-Fisheries (NMFS) is consulting under Section 7 of the
    Endangered Species Act, the Committee is told that NMFS may reach a
    Determination of Destruction or Adverse Modification (DAM) to Critical
    Habitat (CH) for threatened hard corals from deepening and widening
    project, even though the project only has the potential to impact
    approximately 0.09 percent of the 850,560-acre Florida Unit of
    Acroporid coral designated CH. To date, NMFS has not yet shared its
    analysis or best available scientific information that would support
    this potential DAM determination.

        Question 1. When will NMFS share its analysis or best available
    scientific information to support the potential DAM determination?
        Answer. During the Section 7 consultation process, NMFS works with
    Federal action agencies to avoid outcomes that are likely to result in
    either jeopardy for Endangered Species Act (ESA)-listed species or
    destruction or adverse modification (DAM) for designated or proposed
    critical habitat, or both. A determination as to whether the Port
    Everglades project is likely to result in DAM can only be made after
    conducting a thorough evaluation, including evaluating the relative
    importance of the area to be affected to the overall recovery of the
    species. The Port Everglades current impact area is estimated to
    contain over 700 acres of coral reefs, more than 200 acres of which are
    designated critical habitat for seven species of threatened coral. And
    the northerly portion of the Florida reef tract is especially important
    for coral recovery under expected climate scenarios.

        Question 2. Will this allow for a final biological opinion by
    October 2024, which is from the most recent project implementation
    schedule?
        Answer. NMFS understands the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' project
    implementation schedule anticipates completing the ESA consultation
    process in November 2024. Our ability to meet that deadline will depend
    on when we receive the remaining information we requested, including
    the mitigation and monitoring implementation plan and the adaptive
    management plan.

        Question 3. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers hosted an Industry Day
    on January 28, 2023 in Ft. Lauderdale to gain information on mitigation
    and coral nursery options for the project. It was apparent that the
    coral industry could support the Corps' initial estimate for mitigation
    presented at Industry Day (more than 700,000 coral relocations or
    plantings), but even that amount of mitigation would require extensive
    collaboration among the coral industry. Please provide the Committee
    with information from NMFS on how additional outplantings realistically
    could be accomplished in line with NMFS suggestions of somewhere
    between 1.5 and 6.2 million corals, given that the industry does not
    exist to meet these higher suggested outplantings.
        Answer. NMFS shares the Committee's concern that mitigating
    extremely large impacts to corals and coral reefs with coral
    outplanting would be costly and complicated. NMFS has suggested that
    the Corps re-evaluate potential engineering solutions that could be
    more cost-effective and risk-averse, such as pumping dredged sediment
    directly to the Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site, to reduce the
    scale of impact of the project and avoid and minimize impacts to coral
    reefs. USACE is in the process of developing a Supplemental
    Environmental Impact Statement, and NMFS intends to continue to work
    collaboratively with the USACE and the State of Florida to refine
    impact estimates and plan for mitigation that is both feasible and
    effective.
    Broadband Programs
        Recent reports, including the September 2023 Red Light Report,
    raise concerns that rather than fulfilling its mission to connect the
    unserved to the internet, the Department may be focusing its efforts on
    discriminatory technology mandates, funding wasteful duplication in
    areas that already have broadband service, and adopting extralegal
    requirements to achieve a left-wing social agenda.

        Question 1. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)
    expressly prohibits the regulation of broadband prices. Do you agree
    that requiring broadband providers to offer specific prices or pricing
    tiers to participate in government funded programs is a form of rate
    regulation?
        Answer. IIJA expressly provides that nothing in the statute should
    be construed to authorize NTIA to regulate the rates charged for
    broadband service and, consistent with that statutory provision, NTIA
    is not engaged in rate regulation. IIJA also states that ``[t]he
    persistent `digital divide' in the United States is a barrier to'' the
    Nation's ``economic competitiveness [and the] equitable distribution of
    essential public services, including health care and education.''
    Accordingly, IIJA itself requires BEAD Program subgrantees to offer at
    least one ``low-cost broadband service option for eligible
    subscribers.'' Under the statute, Eligible Entities must consult with
    NTIA and propose a definition of ``low-cost broadband service option''
    to NTIA for approval. Satisfying this definition is a condition for
    subgrantees' receipt of BEAD funding. Requiring, as the statute does,
    that providers receiving a BEAD grant offer a low-cost service offering
    is not rate regulation; it is a grant condition and a requirement of
    Federal law.
        Question 2. NTIA staff have reportedly pressured states to include
    certain rate requirements in their state BEAD plans as a condition of
    the Department's approval. Have NTIA or Department of Commerce
    officials, including regional representatives such as state-based
    Federal program officers, told or encouraged state broadband offices to
    include any of the following types of price controls in order to gain
    Commerce approval of the state's BEAD plan? Please indicate yes or no
    for each of the following types of price controls:

        a. Price caps corresponding to speed tiers;

        b. Rate freezes;

        c. Specified prices for ``low-cost'' plan, ``middle-class
    affordability'' plan, or another broadband plan.

        Answer. Consistent with IIJA's prohibition on rate regulation, NTIA
    is not engaged in rate regulation. NTIA is working with Eligible
    Entities to implement the IIJA requirement that BEAD Program
    subgrantees offer at least one ``low-cost broadband service option for
    eligible subscribers.'' Under the statute, Eligible Entities must
    consult with NTIA and propose a definition of ``low-cost broadband
    service option'' to NTIA for approval. In connection with that, I
    understand that NTIA and Department of Commerce officials have told
    state broadband offices that they will need to comply with the low-cost
    option statutory requirement consistent with IIJA and the BEAD NOFO,
    neither of which impose any kind of price control.
        Question 3. Please provide the guidance that NTIA and/or Department
    officials have provided to state broadband offices concerning the types
    of price controls listed below. If NTIA and/or Department officials'
    guidance varies, please provide direct quotes from a representative
    sample of the guidance for each type of price control listed below,
    including public and private communications (including e-mails) to
    state broadband offices.

        a. Price caps corresponding to speed tiers;

        b. Rate freezes;

        c. Specified prices for ``low-cost'' plan, ``middle-class
    affordability'' plan, or another broadband plan.
        Answer. NTIA is working with Eligible Entities to implement the
    IIJA requirement that BEAD Program subgrantees offer at least one
    ``low-cost broadband service option for eligible subscribers.'' Under
    the statute, Eligible Entities must consult with NTIA and propose a
    definition of ``low-cost broadband service option'' to NTIA for
    approval. With respect to that statutory requirement, I understand that
    communications from NTIA and Department of Commerce officials to state
    broadband offices regarding the low-cost broadband service option
    requirement have been consistent with IIJA, the BEAD NOFO, the BEAD
    Program Frequently Asked Questions and Answers, and the BEAD Program
    Initial Proposal Guidance documents.

        Question 4. Please provide all studies, papers, and other economic
    literature, if any, supporting the NTIA and/or Commerce officials'
    guidance on prices indicated in your response to question 14(c).
        Answer. IIJA expressly provides that nothing in the statute should
    be construed to authorize NTIA to regulate the rates charged for
    broadband service and, consistent with that statutory provision,
    nothing in the NOFO or NTIA's guidance regulates rates.
        NTIA is working with Eligible Entities to implement the IIJA
    requirement that BEAD Program subgrantees offer at least one ``low-cost
    broadband service option for eligible subscribers.'' With respect to
    that statutory requirement, NTIA's NOFO and guidance have explained
    that states have considerable discretion in how they address it. The
    guidance cited in response to the above question includes, as one
    example, a low-cost option that draws from the Affordable Connectivity
    Program levels established by Congress in IIJA.
        The Department recognizes the importance of congressional oversight
    of our broadband connectivity activities. The Department is willing to
    brief the Committee on its efforts to ensure networks constructed using
    the BEAD funds are accessible and affordable.

        Question 5. Broadband availability is only lacking in extremely
    remote areas, where there are fewer potential customers to fund
    maintenance of grant-funded projects. Does the Department expect grant
    recipients to be able to maintain broadband service without further
    subsidies from the government?

        a. If not, can you please provide the Department's estimates of the
    total amount of funding needed in the future to continue to subsidize
    BEAD areas?

        b. If yes, can you please provide the estimated returns based on a
    mix of price cap plans by Commerce officials and the expected revenues
    for companies that build BEAD projects?
        Answer. The National Broadband Map shows that there are unserved
    and underserved locations in every state, territory, and the District
    of Columbia in urban, suburban, and rural communities. We expect that a
    diverse array of subgrantees will seek to provide service to those
    unserved and underserved locations through participation in the BEAD
    Program. Those subgrantees will deploy service using an array of
    technologies pursuant to business plans that are unique to their
    situations and underlying cost structures. We fully expect subgrantees
    to seek BEAD funding sufficient to support their long term business
    interests, and, consistent with the BEAD NOFO, NTIA will continue to
    encourage Eligible Entities to minimize BEAD funding outlay, extend the
    reach of the BEAD program funding and help to ensure that every
    unserved location and underserved location in the United States has
    access to reliable, affordable, high-speed Internet service.\6\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ National Telecommunications and Information Administration;
    Notice of Funding Opportunity; Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment
    Program at 20, 22, available https://broadbandusa.ntia.doc.gov/sites/
    default/files/2022-05/BEAD%20NOFO.pdf (herein ``BEAD NOFO'').

        Question 6. What is the Department's estimated percentage of
    customers who will subscribe to BEAD-funded broadband service, and is
    this estimate the same in areas where BEAD projects will overbuild
    available fixed wireless and satellite connectivity?
        Answer. NTIA expects strong adoption and subscription across BEAD-
    funded broadband networks, as those networks will bring affordable,
    reliable high-speed Internet service to locations that currently lack
    access. Rates of adoption and subscription will vary based on, among
    other things, the affordability of the service and customer
    demographics.

        Question 7. In response to Senator Budd's concern about the
    Department's demonstrated bias for fiber technology in its Notice of
    Funding Opportunity and his question about whether it is better to
    spend $500 for satellite or $200,000 for fiber, you said, ``It depends
    on the quality.'' If satellite broadband service can meet the speed and
    latency requirements for the BEAD program as established in the IIJA--
    not less than 100 megabits per second for downloads and 20 megabits per
    second for uploads with latency sufficiently low to allow for
    reasonably foreseeable, real-time, interactive applications, what are
    the quality difference(s) between satellite and fiber that justifies
    paying 400 times more for the latter?
        Answer. There is no ``one-size-fits-all'' approach to broadband
    deployment given each Eligible Entity's unique challenges, and NTIA
    will ensure that the Eligible Entities have flexibility in identifying
    the technical solutions that meet the needs of their communities.
        The BEAD NOFO recognizes the unique characteristics of fiber to
    ``ensure that the network built by the project can easily scale speeds
    over time to. . .meet the evolving connectivity needs of households and
    businesses'' and ``support the deployment of 5G, successor wireless
    technologies, and other advanced services.'' \7\ The BEAD NOFO,
    however, creates room for all strategies and we expect Eligible
    Entities will use a mix of technologies to connect their unserved and
    underserved locations. The NOFO allows applicants to propose to provide
    service over any form of reliable broadband service, including
    terrestrial fixed wireless over licensed spectrum in certain
    circumstances, so long as the service can fulfill the statutory speed
    and latency requirements. Further, each Eligible Entity will set an
    ``Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold'' and may decline to
    select a Priority Broadband Project proposal ``that requires a BEAD
    subsidy that exceeds the Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold for
    any location to be served in the proposal if use of an alternative
    Reliable Broadband Service technology meeting the BEAD Program's
    technical requirements would be less expensive.'' \8\ It also permits
    funding of satellite and unlicensed wireless service for those
    locations if there is no other proposal from a provider of Reliable
    Broadband Service.\9\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ Id. at Sec. 60102(a)(2)(I).
        \8\ NOFO at 38.
        \9\ Id.

        Question 8. You and Assistant Secretary Davidson claimed that
    states will have flexibility to deploy a variety of technologies. Your
    claims, however, are at odds with your agency's actions. For example,
    Commerce's rules prohibit states from funding non-fiber projects
    without a waiver from NTIA while allowing BEAD dollars to overbuild
    certain technologies on a blanket basis. Will you revise BEAD guidance
    and eliminate those rules and others that are biased towards certain
    technology?
        Answer. It is not correct that Commerce's rules prohibit states
    from funding non-fiber projects without a waiver from NTIA. Applicants
    can propose to provide service over any form of reliable broadband
    service. Eligible Entities each have the authority to decline to select
    a Priority Broadband Project proposal ``that requires a BEAD subsidy
    that exceeds the Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold for any
    location to be served in the proposal if use of an alternative Reliable
    Broadband Service technology meeting the BEAD Program's technical
    requirements would be less expensive.'' Further, NTIA expects that
    there will be a significant number of locations where the only
    proposals are not Priority Broadband Projects (i.e., not end-to-end
    fiber) and Eligible Entities are not required to seek a waiver to fund
    such projects.
        The BEAD NOFO takes this approach because there is no ``one-size-
    fits-all'' approach to broadband deployment given each Eligible
    Entity's unique challenges, and NTIA will ensure that the Eligible
    Entities have flexibility in identifying the technical solutions that
    meet the needs of their communities.
        Question 9. In the BEAD NOFO, NTIA instructed states ``to set the
    Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold as high as possible to help
    ensure that end-to-end fiber projects are deployed wherever feasible.''
    Please provide the guidance that NTIA and/or Department officials
    provided to state broadband offices regarding how high to set the
    Extremely High Cost Threshold. If NTIA and/or Department officials'
    guidance varies, please provide direct quotes from a representative
    sample of the guidance provided, including public guidance and private
    communications (including e-mails) to state broadband offices. \10\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ ``Notice of Funding Opportunity: Broadband Equity, Access, and
    Deployment Program.'' National Telecommunications and Information
    Administration (NTIA). https://broadbandusa.ntia
    .doc.gov/sites/default/files/2022-05/BEAD%20NOFO.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. I understand that communications from NTIA and Department
    of Commerce officials to state broadband offices regarding the
    extremely high cost per location threshold have been consistent with
    IIJA, the BEAD NOFO, the BEAD Program Frequently Asked Questions and
    Answers,\11\ and the BEAD Program Initial Proposal Guidance
    documents.\12\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \11\ Broadband, Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program
    Frequently Asked Questions and Answers Version 4.0 at 8 (item 1.18,)
    available at https://broadbandusa.ntia.doc.gov/
    sites/default/files/2023-11/
    Broadband_Equity_Access_Deployment_Program_Frequently_Asked_
    Questions_Version_4.0.pdf.
        \12\ Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program
    Initial Proposal Guidance at 49-51, available at https://
    broadbandusa.ntia.doc.gov/sites/default/files/2023-10/BEAD_
    Initial_Proposal_Guidance_Volumes_I_II_10-2023.pdf.

        Question 10. Will you clarify to states that if satellite and other
    broadband technologies can meet the requirements established in BEAD,
    that they should weigh the costs appropriately rather than
    automatically preference fiber to better ensure that all Americans can
    receive broadband service through this funding?
        Answer. Consistent with the underlying statute, the BEAD NOFO
    recognizes the unique characteristics of fiber to ``ensure that the
    network built by the project can easily scale speeds over time to . . .
    meet the evolving connectivity needs of households and businesses'' and
    ``support the deployment of 5G, successor wireless technologies, and
    other advanced services.'' \13\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \13\ IIJA at Sec. 60102(a)(2)(I).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        There is no ``one-size-fits-all'' approach to broadband deployment
    given each Eligible Entity's unique challenges, and NTIA will ensure
    that the Eligible Entities have flexibility in identifying the
    technical solutions that meet the needs of their communities. The NOFO
    recognizes the unique characteristics of fiber to ``ensure that the
    network built by the project can easily scale speeds over time to . . .
    meet the evolving connectivity needs of households and businesses'' and
    ``support the deployment of 5G, successor wireless technologies, and
    other advanced services.'' The BEAD NOFO, however, creates room for all
    strategies and we expect Eligible Entities will use a mix of
    technologies to connect their unserved and underserved locations. The
    NOFO allows applicants to propose to provide service over any form of
    reliable broadband service, including terrestrial fixed wireless over
    licensed spectrum in certain circumstances. It also permits funding of
    satellite and unlicensed wireless service for the locations that each
    state identifies as the most expensive to serve.

        Question 11. Please provide the specific methodology that the
    Department used to determine the high-cost portion of BEAD funding
    allocations.
        Answer. IIJA tasked NTIA with defining ``high-cost areas'' as part
    of the BEAD allocation formula. To qualify as a high-cost area, IIJA
    requires the area to contain at least 80 percent unserved locations. As
    a result, census block groups that both met the ``high-cost''
    definition and contained at least 80 percent unserved locations are
    eligible to be designated as a high-cost area. In accordance with
    IIJA's mandate, NTIA defined ``high cost'' using a cost model that
    incorporates an area's remoteness, population density, topography, and
    poverty levels, and that measures costs over the life of the network.
    For example, NTIA's model accounts for the fact that remote areas will
    face additional costs for broadband deployment and that unique
    topography can often make broadband deployment more difficult and
    costly. In addition, the model relies on the average cost of building
    out broadband service in unserved areas, utilizing the net present
    value over the lifetime of the network, not just the cost of
    construction. NTIA defined ``area'' to mean census block groups.

        Question 12. Please list the total amount of high-cost BEAD funding
    that was allocated to states or other eligible entities.
        Answer. NTIA, as directed by statute, allocated ten percent of the
    BEAD Program budget--$4.245 billion--in high-cost BEAD funding based on
    the number of unserved locations in high-cost areas.\14\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \14\ IIJA Sec. 60102(c)(1)(A).

        Question 13. What specific actions has Commerce taken in response
    to the Department of Commerce Office of Inspector General Management
    Alert concerning increased fraud risk in the Tribal Broadband
    Connectivity Program (TBCP) published on July 10, 2023?
        Answer. Across all broadband programs, NTIA has been actively
    working with the Department's Office of Inspector General (OIG) team to
    bolster controls against waste, fraud, and abuse. In the TBCP program,
    Congress directed NTIA to address the urgent needs of Tribal
    communities to access broadband for basic needs, like learning,
    telework, and healthcare. NTIA is working to faithfully implement this
    urgent, bipartisan priority, so that Tribal communities can have
    affordable, high-speed broadband and taxpayer dollars are used
    responsibly.
        NTIA has taken several steps to ensure taxpayer funds remain
    directed to Tribal areas where the need is greatest, consistent with
    Congress's intent. NTIA has begun using the new FCC mapping data,
    rather than Form 477, which is more granular data than ever before on
    service availability. NTIA has also standardized its mapping analysis
    and protocol for verifying service for each applicant. And it has also
    standardized the de-duplication process its partner agencies by
    instituting protocols for coordinating with the FCC, USDA, and Treasury
    to identify and address potential duplication for each potential
    awardee.
        NTIA also consulted with the OIG on the next round of TBCP funding
    and the second TBCP NOFO (NOFO II), which NTIA released in July
    2023.\15\ NTIA incorporated improvements from the NOFO I process and
    other enhancements, including more robust broadband service
    verification and deduplication processes. NOFO II also incorporates
    feedback from the OIG concerning disclosures, reporting, whistleblower
    protections, and enforcement provisions. These improvements also
    respond to OIG recommendations to formalize NTIA policies and
    procedures for verifying Tribal government certifications.\16\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \15\ NOFO II, available at https://ntia.gov/sites/default/files/
    2023-07/ntia-tbcp-round2-nofo
    .pdf. This NOFO also incorporates the definition of affordability found
    in the BEAD NOFO and includes a definition of reliability.
        \16\ Tribal Government Certifications allow applicants to attest to
    the ``unserved'' status of proposed service areas within Tribal Lands,
    and lands providing services to Tribal members, with a description of
    how the Tribe determined that the area is ``unserved.'' Id. at page 6-
    7. The second NOFO details accompanying requirements when applicants
    choose to submit a Tribal Government Certification.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In addition to these examples, NTIA continues to develop and
    enhance protocols to protect against waste, fraud, and abuse.

        Question 14. Have Commerce officials reviewed all previously
    awarded grants in the TBCP to check for potential overlap with other
    Federal programs?

        a. If so, how many awards have been identified as overlapping with
    another Federal award?

        b. How many awards have been revoked because they overlapped with
    another Federal award?

        c. What the is total amount of funding revoked?
        Answer. NTIA administers the Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program
    (TBCP). NTIA recognizes the importance of ensuring that TBCP funds are
    directed where they are most needed. NTIA is working with other
    agencies to take steps to address concerns about potential overlap.
    Those actions could include measures like applying special award
    conditions or amending the scope of awards.

        Question 15. What contractor(s) has NTIA hired to assist with
    broadband programs?

        a. Please list contractors separately by program.

        b. Please indicate the specific task each contractor is responsible
    for.

        c. Please indicate the office that oversees the contractor(s).
        Answer. NTIA has several contractors that provide professional and
    technological support services for NTIA's broadband grant programs.
    These contracts are managed and overseen in NTIA's Office of Internet
    Connectivity and Growth (OICG), the office that manages NTIA's
    broadband grant programs.
        NTIA's professional services contracts for grants programs--
    including the Broadband Infrastructure Program (BIP), the Tribal
    Broadband Connectivity Program (TBCP), the Connecting Minority
    Communities (CMC) Program, the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment
    (BEAD) Program, the Digital Equity Act Programs, and the Enabling
    Middle Mile Broadband Infrastructure Program (Middle Mile)--partner
    with Deloitte Consulting and Corner Alliance. These contracts include
    program administration, communications and outreach, grants
    administration, technical assistance, environmental and historic
    preservation support, pre-and post-award grants administration and
    monitoring support, program management support, and data analytics and
    management tools support.
        In addition, NTIA has contract with Software Information Resource
    Corp (SIRC) for the development and implementation of a Salesforce
    solution for both customer relationship management (CRM) and a
    programmatic grants management platform for application intake and
    review as well as post award report intake, review, and monitoring
    activities. This contract primarily supports the BEAD, Digital Equity,
    and Middle Mile programs, but facets of this solution also support
    NTIA's broader CRM and stakeholder engagement activities across all of
    its broadband grant programs, including BIP, CMC, and TBCP.
        NTIA has a contract with CostQuest Associates to obtain statutorily
    required datasets, specifically the Broadband Fabric, which is also
    used by the Federal Communication Commission's new broadband maps, as
    well as broadband cost data and analytics professional services, to
    support analytics efforts for NTIA and for States. (NTIA has built a
    BEAD Eligible Entity Toolkit with access to these datasets and
    analytical tools as a part of its Technical Assistance efforts).
    Although BEAD is the primary grant program using this data set and
    analytics tool, it is also used for NTIA's infrastructure grant
    programs, including BIP, Middle Mile, and TBCP. Additionally, the
    Broadband Fabric and broadband cost data is available to other Federal
    agencies and the Eligible Entities through NTIA's contract. To support
    the use of this data set and analytics tools, NTIA also has a contract
    with ArcGIS, a web-based mapping platform, leveraged by NTIA's National
    Broadband Availability Map (NBAM), but also used to support all of its
    broadband grant programs, to provide data analytics insights on
    broadband availability, adoption, and use--as well as other socio-
    economic layers that have been integrated in to the NBAM platform. NTIA
    also has a contract with INSPIRE to support its stakeholder outreach
    and engagement events and activities (e.g., webinars, conferences) as
    well as its grant program Technical Assistance events.
    NTIA Organization
        The Commerce Department has reserved $849 million from the BEAD
    program for administration costs.

        Question 1. Please explain in detail what costs the Commerce
    Department is incurring for BEAD, including all expense categories over
    $1 million. For funding that does not yet have a plan for expenditure,
    please note as such.
        Answer. NTIA operates the BEAD Program within its relevant
    budgetary cap and will continue to do so moving forward. NTIA's current
    projections have active BEAD sub-grant projects through FY32. In FY23,
    NTIA secured the contract resources noted above and hired professional
    staff to serve as Federal program officers working directly with the
    states and territories to support the long-term needs of the program.

        Question 2. If the Commerce Department determines that it does not
    need the full $849 million for BEAD's administration, will it send this
    funding to states that cannot meet their 100 percent connectivity goal
    with their current allocations?
        Answer. Given the complexity, length, and size of the NTIA's
    broadband programs and the needs for implementation Technical
    Assistance and strong oversight and monitoring, NTIA does not
    anticipate having remaining funds (at least sufficient for potentially
    allocating to States to compensate any States falling short of their
    100 percent connectivity goal) at the closeout of the program. Further,
    NTIA will not know if there will be availability of funds until at
    least 2030, when NTIA anticipates State subgrantees will start closing
    out on their projects. It is important to note that NTIA expects States
    will be able to leverage other broadband infrastructure Federal
    funding, including those programs administered through the Federal
    Communications Commission, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and
    Department of the Treasury, State-funded grant programs, as well as
    private sector investment, to meet the 100 percent connectivity goal,
    along with the Federal investments from BEAD.

        Question 3. Please provide the organization chart for NTIA,
    including all offices and every position within each office, even if a
    position is currently vacant (note such positions as such).
        Answer. See attachment #1

        Question 4. For each position identified in the chart provided in
    response to question 14(c), please provide the position's full
    description, including goals and expectations for the Senior Advisor
    for Algorithmic Justice in the Office of the Assistant Secretary of
    NTIA.
        Answer. The position description for the Senior Advisor for
    Algorithmic Justice is below:

        Works with Administrator and staff on:

       Thought leadership on Internet of things, algorithmic
            transparency and justice, and smart cities.

       Thought leadership with respect to data analytics in energy,
            transportation, resilience planning, broadband, and other areas
            covered by the IIJA. In particular, projects concerning how
            government and private parties can work together on digital
            infrastructure in the public interest, with a view to
            increasing trust, and best practices around ethical AI and
            algorithmic innovation.

       Thought leadership with respect to information structures
            supportive of democratic practice, including decentralized
            authentication, civic information and engagement, online harm
            reduction, and journalism support.
    Spectrum
        Expanding commercial access to midband spectrum is critical to our
    Nation's economic growth and security. Unfortunately, large swaths of
    our Nation's midband spectrum is controlled by Federal agencies that do
    not want to share.

        Question 1. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)
    provided $50 million for DOD to study the feasibility of allowing
    commercial wireless services to operate in the 3.1-3.45 GHz band. While
    the study has not been publicly released, initial reports suggest that
    DOD has found that little or no spectrum in the band could be
    repurposed for commercial wireless services. Is that correct?

        Question 2. If DOD needs more money to free up spectrum in the
    lower 3 GHz band, how much more does it need?

        Question 3. Did the study calculate the gap in funding that would
    need to be filled in order to make repurposing feasible, or did it
    simply conclude that it isn't feasible?

        Question 4. Beyond the lower 3 GHz band, what other mid-band
    spectrum frequencies currently occupied by DOD or other Federal
    agencies could be repurposed for commercial wireless services?
        Answer. The National Telecommunications and Information
    Administration (NTIA) has a dual imperative built into its statutory
    role. NTIA is both the manager of Federal spectrum resources, and the
    President's primary advisor on these issues. Given these dual roles,
    NTIA's obligation is to work with the agencies to ensure that we have
    the spectrum needed for our economic security and growth while
    protecting national security and critical Federal missions and
    capabilities. To meet this obligation, it is absolutely essential that
    bands be studied before decisions are made about repurposing.
        On September 28, 2023, the Department of Defense submitted its
    Emerging Mid-Band Radar Spectrum Sharing (EMBRSS) Feasibility
    Assessment to the Department of Commerce. Consistent with the statutory
    requirement, the Department of Commerce has been reviewing the 1200-
    page report--which includes numerous classified annexes--and is
    coordinating with the DoD and other Federal stakeholders to determine
    the next steps beyond the EMBRSS study with the complementary goals of
    furthering U.S. economic competitiveness while ensuring a strong
    national security. The White House is actively coordinating interagency
    discussions on spectrum policy to ensure all options are considered to
    achieve the Nation's economic and national security needs.
        Additionally, the National Spectrum Strategy, released on November
    13, 2023, identifies over 2,700 MHz--nearly double NTIA's initial 1,500
    MHz target and more than 1600 MHz of mid-band spectrum, including the
    lower 3 GHz and 7-8 GHz bands--of spectrum across five spectrum bands
    for in-depth study for potential new uses by both the private sector
    and federal agencies. The Biden-Harris Administration published an
    Implementation Plan on March 12, 2024, to carry out the Strategy, which
    is envisioned as a living document, intended to be assessed and updated
    in the future as spectrum requirements and opportunities evolve. The
    Implementation Plan sets out requirements for a follow-on study to the
    EMBRSS report.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roger Wicker to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
        Question 1. Do you agree that it is important to enhance and
    balance security and assurance across all of the phases of the
    lifecycle of semiconductor design, manufacture, packaging, test, and
    use?
        Answer. The Department agrees with this statement and the CHIPS
    program is being executed to increase domestic capacity across
    manufacturing, packaging, supply chain, and R&D.

        Question 2. I am aware of a proposal to award CHIPS Incentive
    Program funding for a ``secure enclave'' to one company that is focused
    on that company's semiconductor fabrication and packaging facilities.

        a. Is it the Commerce Department's view that such an award--
    potentially for billions of dollars--is consistent with the underlying
    CHIPS statute and congressional intent?

        b If so, can you please cite an instance where the secure enclave
    concept and the possibility of such an award was discussed with Members
    of Congress on the relevant committees of jurisdiction prior to the
    enactment of the Chips and Science Act?

        c. Do you believe that Members of Congress and staff on relevant
    committees, including the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation
    Committee and Senate Armed Services Committee, should have access to
    the analysis being used to support the secure enclave proposal?
        Answer. Every CHIPS Act award will satisfy the requirements of the
    CHIPS Act. There is not a detailed communications record concerning any
    such discussions and deliberations on Secure Enclave that the
    Department is able to share. The Department recognizes the important
    oversight role that Congress plays here, and will continue to provide
    information consistent with application confidentiality considerations
    and legal restrictions.

        Question 3. Should the Department make an award for the secure
    enclave proposal or any such similar proposal, do you commit to
    providing expeditiously to Congress the full list of otherwise
    meritorious applications that the Department was forced to reject for
    lack of available funding?
        Answer. The CHIPS program is oversubscribed, and not all eligible
    applicants will receive CHIPS funds. The Department carefully evaluates
    how to allocate CHIPS funds to maximize the national security and
    economic security impacts of the program.

        Question 4. Are you aware of the recent Department of Defense
    Microelectronics Quantifiable Assurance (MQA) independent review of
    microelectronics security, which represents a consensus view amongst 27
    senior experts across government, the defense industrial base, and the
    semiconductor industry?

        a. Are you aware that following completion of this report, the
    Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, Dr. William
    LaPlante, and the Undersecretary of Defense for Research and
    Engineering, Heidi Shyu, issued a press release lauding the report's
    conclusions and recommendations?
        Answer. Yes.

        b. Do you agree with the MQA independent review's finding regarding
    the need to further develop affordable security overlays and MQA
    standards and implement independent checks throughout the semiconductor
    lifecycle which are tailored to the type and use of the chip?
        Answer. Yes.

        c. Are you aware that in 2014, the Department of Defense certified
    a major U.S.-based manufacturer of advanced semiconductors as a
    ``Trusted Foundry'' qualified to produce classified and export-
    controlled chips for national security at a small fraction of the cost
    of the proposed secure enclave? Are you also aware that this company's
    most advanced fab received accreditation in May of this year as a
    Trusted Supplier using a flexible and affordable ``security overlay''
    approach?
        Answer. Yes, based on publicly available information.

        d. Are you aware that the MQA independent review based its
    recommendations regarding affordable and sufficient security overlays
    on the methodology reflected in this recent Department of Defense
    security accreditation?
        Answer. MQA is one among multiple approaches to secure chip
    production.

        Question 5. I am concerned that NTIA's guidance for the BEAD
    program facilitated and effectively required states to propose price
    controls and scoring that do not align with the marketplace or reality.
    Will you reject state plans that propose any rate caps which would
    starve BEAD-funded networks and either require ongoing government
    subsidies just to remain viable or to fail because they have no ability
    to cover operating costs?
        Answer. IIJA expressly provides that nothing in the statute should
    be construed to authorize NTIA to regulate the rates charged for
    broadband service and, consistent with that statutory provision,
    nothing in the National Telecommunications and Information
    Administration's (NTIA) BEAD Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) or
    guidance regulates rates or imposes any price controls.\17\ IIJA also
    states that ``[t]he persistent `digital divide' in the United States is
    a barrier to'' the Nation's ``economic competitiveness [and the]
    equitable distribution of essential public services, including health
    care and education.'' \18\ Accordingly, IIJA itself requires BEAD
    Program subgrantees to offer at least one ``low-cost broadband service
    option for eligible subscribers.'' \19\ Under the statute, Eligible
    Entities must consult with NTIA and propose a definition of ``low-cost
    broadband service option'' to NTIA for approval.\20\ Satisfying this
    definition is a condition for subgrantees' receipt of BEAD funding.
    Requiring, as the statute does, that providers receiving a BEAD grant
    offer a low-cost service offering is not rate regulation; it is a grant
    condition and a requirement of Federal law.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \17\ IIJA. at Sec. 60102(h)(5)(D).
        \18\ Id at Sec. 60101(2) (2021).
        \19\ Id. at Sec. 60102(h)(4)(B).
        \20\ Id. at Sec. 60102(h)(4)(B), (5)(B)(ii).

        Question 6. NTIA's BEAD program requires a 25 percent Letter of
    Credit on top of the 25 percent match. This requirement will make
    deployments more expensive for all providers and lead to less capital
    going toward broadband deployment. While I recognize the need for the
    government to protect the public investment, there are alternative ways
    NTIA can protect the public and not increase costs unreasonably for
    providers seeking to participate in BEAD. Is NTIA looking at
    alternatives to the Letter of Credit requirement? If so, will NTIA
    engage stakeholders to ensure the feasible of alternatives?
        Answer. As NTIA administers the BEAD Program, we are committed to
    being good stewards of taxpayer dollars. That means making sure BEAD
    Program subgrantees can see their deployment projects through--not just
    to the end of construction, but on an ongoing basis as service
    providers deliver affordable, reliable high-speed Internet service. To
    that end, the NOFO required prospective subgrantees to provide an
    irrevocable standby letter of credit to the Eligible Entity (i.e., the
    50 states, five territories, and the District of Columbia) before
    entering into a subgrantee agreement. The amount of the letter of
    credit must be no less than 25 percent of the subaward amount.\21\ The
    NOFO also invited Eligible Entities to propose alternatives ``if they
    are necessary and sufficient to ensure that the Program's objectives
    are met.'' \22\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \21\ BEAD NOFO at 72, 73.
        \22\ Id. at 71.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        On November 1, 2023, NTIA published a conditional programmatic
    waiver that modifies the letter of credit requirement for subgrantees
    of all Eligible Entities in the following ways:

       Allow Credit Unions to Issue letters of credit. The NOFO
            requires subgrantees to obtain a letter of credit from a U.S.
            bank with a safety rating issued by Weiss of B- or better. The
            waiver permits subgrantees to fulfill the letter of credit
            Requirement (or any alternative permitted under the waiver)
            utilizing any United States credit union that is insured by the
            National Credit Union Administration and that has a credit
            union safety rating issued by Weiss of B- or better.

       Allow Use of Performance Bonds. The waiver permits a
            subgrantee to provide a performance bond equal to 100 percent
            of the BEAD subaward amount in lieu of a letter of credit,
            provided that the bond is issued by a company holding a
            certificate of authority as an acceptable surety on Federal
            bonds as identified in the Department of Treasury Circular 570.

       Allow Eligible Entities to Reduce the Obligation Upon
            Completion of Milestones. The waiver allows an Eligible Entity
            to reduce the amount of the letter of credit obligation below
            25 percent over time, or reduce the amount of the performance
            bond below 100 percent over time, upon a subgrantee meeting
            deployment milestones specified by the Eligible Entity.

       Allow for an Alternative Initial letter of credit or
            Performance Bond Percentage. The NOFO requires that the initial
            amount of the letter of credit be 25 percent of the subaward
            (or the initial amount of the performance bond be 100 percent
            of the subaward under the option described above). The waiver
            allows the initial amount of the letter of credit or
            performance bond to be 10 percent of the subaward amount during
            the entire period of performance when an Eligible Entity issues
            funding on a reimbursable basis consistent with Section
            IV.C.1.b of the NOFO and reimbursement is for periods of no
            more than six months each.

        By providing an expanded universe of potential issuers of letters
    of credit and specific, permissible alternatives to the letter of
    credit requirement, NTIA remains faithful to our objectives of
    encouraging robust participation from a broad range of service
    providers while giving states and territories more ways to ensure that
    grant recipients can build a high-quality network and operate it for
    years to come.
                                     ______

           Response to Written Questions Submitted by Deb Fischer to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
        As you know, the bipartisan infrastructure law directed a study to
    examine ways to open new spectrum frequencies without imperiling vital
    national security operations in the 3.1-3.45 gigahertz band. The
    Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information
    Administration (NTIA) and the Department of Defense (DOD) co-chaired
    the study that produced a final report -submitted to the Department of
    Commerce (DOC) three weeks ago--including input and discussion from
    industry and Federal stakeholders.
        During the hearing, you verbally affirmed your support of a joint
    briefing with the DOD to disseminate the contents of the report with
    members of both the Senate Commerce Committee and Senate Armed Services
    Committee. However, it is my understanding that the DOC and NTIA
    suddenly withdrew from participating in the upcoming briefing scheduled
    for this exact purpose. I am concerned by this development, which
    appears to conflict with your remarks during the hearing.

        Question 1. Going forward, will you commit that the appropriate
    representatives from the DOC and NTIA will fully participate in
    scheduled briefings related to implementation of this report?
        Answer. On September 28, 2023, the Department of Defense (DoD)
    submitted its Emerging Mid-Band Radar Spectrum Sharing (EMBRSS)
    Feasibility Assessment to the Department of Commerce. The Department
    appreciated the opportunity to have provided a briefing on November 16,
    2023, to the Committee, in conjunction with the DoD, on the contents of
    the report after it was submitted by the DoD to the Department. The
    Department and its DoD colleagues are committed to working with the
    Committee to ensure it can perform its oversight functions related to
    the report.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
    AI NIST Risk Management Framework
        Artificial intelligence is one of the key technology areas in the
    CHIPS and Science Act, and both the Department of Commerce and the
    Foundation have significant interest in the development of AI. Among
    these efforts is NIST's Artificial Intelligence Risk Management
    Framework, which was authorized by Congress to help establish a
    baseline of good practices for organizations who develop and employ AI
    to follow.

        Question 1. How will organizations employing NIST's Artificial
    Intelligence Risk Management Framework be better prepared to mitigate
    potential risks associated with AI use, compared to organizations not
    using the RMF?
        Answer. The NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) offers a
    voluntary resource to the organizations designing, developing,
    deploying, or using AI systems to help manage the potential risks of AI
    and promote trustworthy and responsible development and use of AI
    systems. Released in January 2023, the AI RMF is a framework that
    provides a flexible, structured, and measurable process to address AI
    risks purposefully and continually throughout the AI lifecycle. The
    NIST AI RMF provides a set of outcomes that enable dialogue,
    understanding, and actions to manage AI risks. The Framework is
    intended to be voluntary, rights-preserving, non-sector-specific, and
    use-case agnostic, providing flexibility to organizations of all sizes
    and in all sectors and throughout society to implement the approaches
    in the Framework. The AI RMF is designed to be practical, to adapt to
    the AI landscape as AI technologies continue to develop, and to be
    operationalized by organizations in varying degrees and capacities so
    society can benefit from AI while also being protected from its
    potential harms. The NIST AI RMF has been exceptionally well-received
    nationally and internationally, where public and private entities in
    the United States and abroad are adopting or incorporating it in their
    responsible AI practices. We are following up with additional resources
    for the implementation of the Framework, such as a companion resource
    for generative AI.
    Workforce Challenges for High-Demand Fields
        Question 1. How is the Department working to ensure that our Nation
    can recruit, educate, and retain the world's brightest minds that will
    move our technology-driven economy forward through advancement in AI,
    quantum computing, and other key technologies?
        Answer. In the one year since the CHIPS and Science Act was signed
    into law, companies have announced over $166 billion in manufacturing
    in semiconductors and electronics, and at least 50 community colleges
    in 19 states have announced new or expanded programming to help
    American workers access good-paying jobs in the semiconductor industry.
    As part of the Biden Administration's long-term vision for CHIPS for
    America,
        Secretary Raimondo has called on the United States to double the
    semiconductor workforce overall, for U.S. colleges and universities to
    triple the number of graduates in semiconductor-related fields, and for
    semiconductor companies to work with high schools, community colleges,
    and unions to train 100,000 new technicians. CHIPS for America will
    embrace a whole-of-society approach across government, education, labor
    unions, industry, and community organizations to achieve these
    ambitious goals.
        The Department of Commerce is committed to helping more American
    workers compete and win in the 21st century global economy. The
    National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Manufacturing
    Extension Partnership (MEP) helps businesses narrow gaps in our supply
    chains and make manufacturing more resilient. NIST has issued a Notice
    of Funding Opportunity for Manufacturing USA Workforce, Education and
    Vibrant Ecosystems (WEAVE) public service awards to the 17
    Manufacturing USA institutes designed to engage Historically Black
    Colleges and Universities and other Minority Serving Institutions and
    rural serving institutions of higher education. NIST is currently
    reviewing applications and anticipates awards will be announced by the
    end of the calendar year.
        In Spring 2024, NIST will announce a funding opportunity for a new
    Commerce Department-sponsored Manufacturing USA institute focused on an
    advanced manufacturing topic using FY23 appropriated funds. As with all
    Manufacturing USA institutes, there will be a program to educate and
    train skilled workers, working with national resources ranging from
    community and technical colleges to Tier 1 research universities.
        NIST is also proactively supporting the Nation's workforce needs in
    critical and emerging technology areas. For example:

       NIST's joint institutes, JILA, the Joint Quantum Institute
            (JQI), and the Joint Center for Quantum Information and
            Computer Science (QuICS) play a critical role in educating the
            quantum workforce of tomorrow.

       NIST co-funds with the National Science Foundation the
            Institute for Trustworthy AI in Law and Society (TRAILS).
            TRAILS provides opportunities for training the next generation
            of diverse and multidisciplinary talent to tackle the
            opportunities and challenge that AI systems may bring.

       NIST's NICE (formerly the National Initiative for
            Cybersecurity Education) Program also seeks to energize,
            promote, and coordinate a robust community working together to
            advance an integrated ecosystem of cybersecurity education,
            training, and workforce development. In addition to engaging
            with stakeholders through workshops and events, the Program
            also published and updates the NICE Framework, a common lexicon
            for describing and sharing information about cybersecurity
            work.

        The Economic Development Administration's Regional Technology and
    Innovation Hubs (Tech Hubs) program is working to create regional
    innovation centers across the country by bringing together industry,
    higher education institutions, state and local governments, economic
    development organizations, and labor and workforce partners to
    supercharge ecosystems of innovation for technologies that are
    essential to our national security and economic competitiveness. The
    Tech Hubs program is a key part of President Biden's Investing in
    America agenda, stimulating private sector investment, creating good-
    paying jobs, revitalizing American manufacturing, and ensuring no
    community is left behind by America's economic progress.
        Through the Tech Hubs program, the Department is committed to
    strengthening economic and national security by advancing the
    capacities of regions to manufacture, commercialize, and deploy these
    technologies, guided by the following priorities: (1) making more U.S.
    regions strong competitors in the global innovation economy; (2)
    building strong communities that share in the prosperity technological
    innovations bring; (3) spurring the creation of new good jobs and other
    opportunities for workers at all skill levels; and (4) strengthening
    and increasing the resilience of the supply chains that our innovative
    technology-centric industries rely on to stay secure and competitive.
        On October 23, 2023, EDA announced the 31 Phase 1 Tech Hubs
    designees and 29 Strategy Development Grant awardees and posted the
    Notice of Funding Opportunity for Phase 2. The 31 Tech Hubs focus on
    developing and growing innovative industries in regions across the
    country, including semiconductors, clean energy, critical minerals,
    biotechnology, precision medicine, artificial intelligence, quantum
    computing, and more. The Tech Hubs program required regions to bring
    together consortia aligned on a technology-based economic development
    strategy. These consortia were required to include workforce
    organizations such as labor unions, to ensure both the growth of a
    local, skilled workforce to meet the employment needs of regional
    technology-centric industries and the creation of quality jobs in the
    communities where workers live.
        The Department is grateful to Congress for the $500 million in
    appropriations that we received in FY 2023 to catalyze investment in
    technologies critical to economic growth, national security, and job
    creation, and help communities across the country become centers of
    innovation. The appropriated $500 million represents only five percent
    of the $10 billion that was authorized through the CHIPS and Science
    Act. The level of interest exceeds our currently available funds, which
    means not every deserving applicant will be able to receive Tech Hubs
    designation or funding to build economic development plans to compete
    for future rounds of the Tech Hub program.
    BEAD
        Access to quality broadband is a prerequisite to rural Kansans (and
    rural Americans in general) participating in the type of research and
    development we have discussed today.
        However, I am concerned that some of the recommendations that NTIA
    has pushed for the program in the NOFO and will be weighing in on in
    its coming review and approval of state broadband plans could have an
    adverse effect on that goal of connecting all Americans. These
    concerning provisions include items like labor force and pricing
    requirements that go far beyond what the IIJA directed.

        Question 1. Can you assure us that the NTIA won't push states to
    include such provisions that could, in the end, limit participation in
    the program or hinder the ability of those who do participate to deploy
    broadband in the most efficient and effective manner?
        Answer. NTIA is committed to the success of the Broadband Equity,
    Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program, and we believe the Notice of
    Funding Opportunity (NOFO) strikes an appropriate balance between the
    deployment, access, and affordability objectives established by
    Congress in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. NTIA is committed to
    ensuring BEAD Program participation by Internet Service Providers of
    all types, and continually takes steps to ensure program rules do not
    hinder the ability of Providers to participate, as evidenced by the
    changes NTIA recently undertook to the BEAD Program Letter of Credit
    requirements.
        We will not achieve the goals of the BEAD Program without a high-
    skilled workforce prepared to deploy BEAD-funded networks. That is why
    NTIA asked states to consider workforce development strategies as part
    of their Initial and Final Proposals. This is not a list of
    requirements, but a list of considerations we urge states to think
    through as they consider how their state's workforce will build out
    high-speed Internet infrastructure.
        Additionally, IIJA expressly provides that nothing in the statute
    should be construed to authorize NTIA to regulate the rates charged for
    broadband service,\23\ and, consistent with that statutory provision,
    nothing in the NOFO regulates rates. IIJA also requires BEAD Program
    subgrantees to offer at least one ``low-cost broadband service option
    for eligible subscribers.'' \24\ Requiring, as the statute does, that
    providers receiving a BEAD grant offer a low-cost service offering is
    not rate regulation; it's a grant condition and a requirement of
    Federal law.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \23\ Id. at Sec. 60102(h)(5)(D).
        \24\ Id. at Sec. 60102(h)(4)(B).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Program Flexibilities
        To help make the Tech Hubs program successful across a variety of
    regions and technology sectors, the program's authorization in the
    CHIPS and Science Act is more flexible than that of many programs at
    EDA. For example, the statute defines Tech Hubs matching funds in
    relation to the hub's total operating costs, unlike the Public Works
    and Economic Development Act's definition of cost share, which only
    considers the specific project expenses.
        Similarly, the CHIPS and Science Act defines a range of permissible
    technology maturation, business assistance, and workforce development
    activities that are unusual under other EDA awards.

        Question 1. How is the agency ensuring that its rules, reviewers,
    and staff are positioned so that Tech Hubs consortia will be able to
    make use of this flexibility to fit their regional needs and succeed?
        Answer. On October 23, 2023, the Department of Commerce's Economic
    Development Administration (EDA) designated 31 Tech Hubs that are
    strengthening the country's economic and national security, and global
    competitiveness by enabling the industries of the future to start,
    grow, and remain in regions across the United States. The 31 Designated
    Tech Hubs are eligible to apply to Phase 2 of the program, through
    which EDA expects to award five to 10 Hubs Implementation awards each
    amounting to approximately $40 to $70 million. Each Tech Hub applied as
    a consortium of higher education, government, industry, economic
    development, labor or workforce, and other organizations focused on
    improving technology and innovation across the country. Of the 31 Tech
    Hubs, 11 received Strategy Development Grants to strengthen their
    consortia and mature their approach to becoming more globally
    competitive. EDA awarded an additional 18 Strategy Development Grants
    to consortia to further develop their technology-based economic
    development plans and achieve Tech Hubs designation in the future.
        EDA has designed the Tech Hubs Phase 2 NOFO to implement its
    authorizing statute's flexibilities and to enable Hubs to propose and
    compete for funding for projects that align with each region's unique
    strategy and to address their unique needs. EDA has also established a
    new team to implement and manage the Tech Hubs program, and that team
    combines EDA experience with new skillsets and expertise to effectively
    manage the program and enable applicants, designees, and recipients.
    Quantum Computing
        Question 1. Are we at the point with Quantum computing that NSF or
    NIST or another Federal agency should be developing metrics to
    determine efficacy and efficiency of quantum computations?
        Answer. Research and development of metrics to determine the
    efficacy and efficiency of quantum computations is critical to enabling
    hardware developers to make performance improvements to their
    technology. NIST staff, researchers from across the government,
    academia, and industry, have already begun partnering with U.S.
    standards organizations to explore metrics and performance benchmarking
    for quantum computing. For example, last year, with technical support
    from NIST, the industry-led, Quantum Economic Development Consortium
    released a report titled ``Application-oriented performance benchmarks
    for quantum computing''.
        Quantum computing hardware is very different than classical
    computers and is advancing rapidly, so evaluating it is different and
    presents new challenges--meaning the performance metrics are going to
    be different and are still at an early stage of development. Activities
    are being tempered by the fact that, despite substantial advancements,
    the timing for the arrival of high-impact practical applications of
    quantum computing remains unclear. It will be important that industry,
    academia, and Federal agencies play a role in this research and
    development to ensure that developed metrics accelerate and not hinder
    further innovation.
    Workforce Challenges for Domestic Superconducting Ecosystem
        Question 1. What are the workforce shortfalls in establishing a
    viable domestic superconducting ecosystem and how is DOC working to
    address this need?
        Answer. Superconductors and related technologies are important to a
    number of sectors, from healthcare to energy, from quantum computing to
    space. The need to accelerate the translation from concept to
    manufacturing is recognized in the 2022 National Strategy for Advanced
    Manufacturing. Workforce challenges in superconducting fabrication are
    similar to those in advanced manufacturing more broadly, including
    attracting, retaining, and training talent. Unique challenges include
    competition with the semiconductor industry for a limited talent pool
    and a limited availability of dedicated tools, as superconducting
    materials typically are not allowed in semiconductor facilities to
    preserve semiconductor processing quality, and dedicated space and
    equipment warrant additional costs.
        The Department is dedicated to supporting domestic education and
    workforce development to enhance the Nation's competitiveness. The
    Department's NIST is home to the program office for the Manufacturing
    USA network, which helps prepare workers for high-quality technical
    jobs in advanced manufacturing, including the superconducting industry.
    In advanced manufacturing workforce development, Manufacturing USA
    focuses on three priorities: equip the workforce with evolving skills,
    broaden access to career pathways, and spark interest in careers to
    secure a steady workforce talent pool.
        NIST has been a leader in superconducting research for more than 50
    years, playing a key role in the superconducting ecosystem talent pool
    for research and development and commercialization. Many graduate
    students, postdocs, and guest researchers are being trained in NIST
    laboratories, with access to cutting-edge technologies and
    infrastructure, as well as world-leading scientists who have made
    breakthrough discoveries in superconductivity and its practical
    applications. Many of these researchers become leaders in industry,
    academia, and at other national laboratories.
    DOC and NSF Coordination
        Question 1. In light of the MOU announced on July 26 to improve
    coordination between EDA and NSF on the Tech Hubs and NSF Engines
    programs, what specific steps are NSF and DOC taking to avoid
    duplication between these two programs?
        Answer. The Department of Commerce's Economic Development
    Administration (EDA) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) are
    working closely on the implementation of relevant provisions of the
    CHIPS and Science Act. Regarding Tech Hubs and NSF's Regional
    Innovation Engines, EDA and NSF signed a Memorandum of Understanding
    (MOU) to facilitate data sharing and collaboration these two programs.
    Tech Hubs program is complementary to NSF's Regional Innovation
    Engines. Tech Hubs focuses on scaling up and commercializing products
    and services in key technology areas, where NSF is focusing on use-
    inspired research and development.
        Additionally, NSF is one of the founding Federal agencies for the
    National Semiconductor Technology Center (NSTC) along with the
    Departments of Commerce, Defense, and Energy. These Federal founding
    members will also be a part of a Steering Committee to shape the
    strategy of the NSTC, including semiconductor R&D and workforce
    initiatives.
    CHIPS Clawbacks
        The CHIPS Act has strong language that allows the Commerce
    Department to audit grant recipients and claw back monies from firms
    that have been found to violate the foreign entity of concern
    requirements. The IRA also provided foreign entity of concern language
    for the 30D electric vehicle tax credit. While Treasury is still
    working on guidance for that portion of the bill, it is unclear whether
    or not there is sufficient audit and clawback authority to make sure
    that foreign entity of concern requirements are enforced.

        Question 1. Can you comment on your Department's experience in
    finalizing the foreign entity of concern rules and how you expect the
    audit and clawback authorities to enable better stewardship of taxpayer
    dollars?
        Answer. The Commerce Department is committed to being good stewards
    of taxpayer dollars. The Department fully expects all recipients of
    CHIPS Incentives funding to comply with the guardrails. CHIPS for
    America is a national security initiative, and we will enforce these
    guardrails to uphold our national security. We expect funding
    recipients to create robust programs to ensure compliance. With respect
    to the expansion guardrail, the funding recipient has an affirmative
    obligation to notify Commerce in advance of any significant
    transactions that could result in a material expansion of semiconductor
    capacity in a country of concern. If the Department learns of a
    potential violation of any of the guardrails, including from
    information provided by another Government agency, we will review to
    determine whether the allegation has merit, whether there is a
    possibility to take action that would mitigate any risk to national
    security, or whether we will claw back funding or take other action as
    appropriate.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
        In July, Ranking Member Cruz (R-TX) and Senator Mark Kelly (D-AZ)
    successfully amended this year's National Defense Authorization Act
    (NDAA) to expedite NEPA approvals for semiconductor fabs utilizing
    CHIPS funding opportunities. Last month, in testimony before the House
    Science, Space, and Technology Committee, you noted that expediting
    NEPA approvals for projects utilizing CHIPS funding would ``help us a
    lot to move faster.''

        Question 1. Can you identify other relevant areas in need of
    regulatory streamlining?

        Question 2. In the spirit of the CHIPS Act, does the Department
    support regulatory and permitting streamlining for other semiconductor-
    relevant supply chain inputs like critical mineral development and
    processing, and energy development and pipelines?
        Answer. The Department, in coordination with other Federal
    agencies, welcomes the opportunity to have a dialogue with Congress
    about sectors that could benefit from thoughtful regulatory efficiency
    while protecting the environment.
        The Department is doing everything within its power to stand up a
    fast process for issuing CHIPS incentives. As we build out American
    semiconductor manufacturing capabilities, we must also maintain basic
    environmental protections.
        On December 27, 2023, CHIPS for America program published a draft
    Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) on the Federal Register
    (``Notice of Availability of Draft Programmatic Environmental
    Assessment for Modernization and Internal Expansion of Existing
    Semiconductor Fabrication Facilities Under the CHIPS Incentives
    Program''). The purpose of the PEA is to evaluate the environmental
    impacts of modernization and internal expansion projects that are
    eligible for the February 2023 CHIPS Incentives Program Commercial
    Fabrication Facilities Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO). The
    finalization of the PEA will allow CPO to complete a more streamlined
    NEPA review of these types of modernization projects. Comments must be
    received by January 25, 2024. The CHIPS Environment team is dedicated
    to creating an efficient and robust NEPA process. As detailed in the
    February 2023 NOFO, the CHIPS Program seeks to support current-
    generation and mature-node semiconductors facilities vital to our
    country's national and economic security. A streamlined environmental
    review will allow these upgrade and modernization projects to proceed
    expeditiously.
        The United States is currently the world-leader in AI development,
    deployment, and innovation, but during a committee hearing last month
    on transparency in Artificial Intelligence, witnesses explained that
    other nations are ``working harder than ever to develop the next major
    technological developments in AI. . .''
        The thought of losing our lead in AI development raises a number of
    alarm bells for my colleagues and I, particularly if our lead is lost
    to an adversarial power like China. In briefings and roundtables that
    Congress has had on this topic, it has been estimated that China is
    somewhere between one-and-a-half to two years behind us in AI
    capabilities, however the recent explosion in popularity of generative
    AI has renewed their focus on this race. In fact, this summer the
    Chinese began working on the development of their own lithography
    machines for printing the high-tech chips needed for AI computing.

        Question 1. What role does the CHIPS Act, and the Department of
    Commerce more broadly, have in maintaining U.S. superiority in AI
    development?

        Question 2. Do you see any logical supply chain or computing power
    chokepoints relevant to the Department of Commerce that could be used
    to slow down China's development of AI technology?
        Answer. The Department of Commerce is playing a fundamental role in
    the U.S. Government's policy development that shapes the design,
    development, deployment, and use of artificial intelligence (AI)
    technologies. The Department of Commerce is committed to working across
    the Federal government to develop AI policy that is premised on the
    responsible use of AI technology that mitigates negative risks and
    harnesses potential benefits while promoting safety and innovation. The
    Department engages with a variety of stakeholders, including but not
    limited to academia, civil society, and industry, to better understand
    the current AI landscape and where government can be helpful. The
    Department is undertaking multiple lines of effort related to A.I.
    policies and practices.
        The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) works to
    realize the full promise of AI as a tool that will enable American
    innovation, enhance economic security, and improve our quality of life.
    NIST has several ongoing efforts including conducting fundamental
    research, establishing benchmarks and metrics to evaluate AI
    technologies, leading and participating in the development of technical
    AI standards, and leading discussions both nationally and
    internationally on the development of AI policies. Key efforts include:

       NIST released an AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF),
            which is a voluntary tool to help individuals and organizations
            manage risks associated with AI. NIST also hosts the NIST
            Trustworthy & Responsible AI Resource Center, providing access
            to a wide range of relevant AI resources.

       In July 2023, NIST launched the NIST Generative AI Public
            Working Group to spearhead the development of a cross-sectoral
            AI RMF profile for managing the risks of generative AI models
            or systems. The four program areas include: governance, content
            provenance, pre-deployment testing, and incident disclosure.

       The National AI Advisory Committee (NAIAC), whose members
            are appointed by the Secretary of Commerce, advises the
            President and the National AI Initiative Office on matters
            related to the National AI Initiative. The Committee's first-
            year report, required under the National AI Initiative Act of
            2020, contains recommendations that include adequately funding
            programs under the National Artificial Intelligence Initiative
            Act and the NIST Trustworthy and Responsible AI Program. The
            Committee has also published several non-decisional documents,
            including one on foundational models and generative AI.

       In November 2023, NIST announced the establishment of the
            Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute and its Consortium
            (Consortium) and invited organizations to provide letters of
            interest describing technical expertise and products, data,
            and/or models to enable the development and deployment of safe
            and trustworthy AI systems through the AI RMF. The Federal
            Register notice (88 FR 75276) is the initial step for NIST to
            enable collaborations with non-profit organizations,
            universities, other government agencies, and technology
            companies to address challenges associated with the development
            and deployment of AI. The Consortium equips and empowers
            organizations by the establishment of a new measurement science
            that will enable the identification of proven, scalable, and
            interoperable techniques and metrics to promote development and
            responsible use of safe and trustworthy AI, particularly for
            the most advanced AI systems, such as the most capable
            foundation models.

        As part of President Biden's Executive Order (EO) on Safe, Secure,
    and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence, NIST
    will lead in the development of guidelines and best practices to
    promote consensus industry standards that help ensure the development
    and deployment of safe, secure, and trustworthy AI systems. NIST will
    work in consultation with several other agencies for actions under the
    EO, and NIST will also continue to work with private sector, academia,
    and civil society stakeholders as it produces guidance called for by
    the EO.
        On April 11, 2023, the National Telecommunications and Information
    Administration (NTIA) released a Request for Comment (RFC) inviting
    academic, industry, civil society, government stakeholders, and the
    public to comment on what the Federal government should be doing to
    promote a robust accountability ecosystem for AI and ensure that AI
    systems are implemented fairly and safely. The RFC sought feedback on
    policies that can support the development of AI audits, assessments,
    certifications, and other mechanisms to create responsible and trusted
    AI systems. It further asked whether different approaches are warranted
    for different industries and what other policy responses might be
    appropriate.
        U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is currently studying how
    AI affects the patent system and intellectual property (IP). To this
    end, the agency created an AI and Emerging Technology (ET) Partnership,
    an ongoing cooperative effort between the USPTO and the AI/ET
    community, including academia, independent inventors, small businesses,
    industry, other government agencies, nonprofits, and civil society.
    Additionally, the agency has issued two reports on the intersection of
    IP and AI, including Public Views on AI and IP Policy, and Inventing
    AI--Tracing the diffusion of AI within U.S. Patents.
        In October 2022, the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and
    Security (BIS) imposed restrictions on the PRC's access to advanced
    semiconductor manufacturing equipment, chips and other items needed to
    develop AI and prohibited U.S. persons from supporting chip development
    and production that power AI systems at certain semiconductor
    fabrication facilities located in the PRC or Macau without a license.
    BIS continues to assess technologies within the AI ecosystem to
    identify technologies necessary for control to ensure the national
    security of the United States. On October 17, 2023, the BIS released a
    package of rules designed to update export controls on advanced
    computing semiconductors and semiconductor manufacturing equipment, as
    well as items that support supercomputing applications and end-uses, to
    arms embargoed countries, including the PRC, and to place additional
    Chinese entities on the Entity List. These controls were strategically
    crafted to address, among other concerns, the PRC's efforts to obtain
    semiconductor manufacturing equipment essential to producing advanced
    integrated circuits needed for the next generation of advanced weapon
    systems, as well as high-end advanced computing semiconductors
    necessary to enable the development and production of technologies such
    as artificial intelligence (AI) used in military applications. These
    rules reinforce the October 7, 2022, controls to restrict the PRC's
    ability to both purchase and manufacture certain high-end chips
    critical for military advantage.
        In August 2022, the International Trade Administration (ITA) issued
    a RFC on Artificial Intelligence Export Competitiveness, exploring
    foreign regulations and potential trade barriers.
        As we work with other Federal agencies to promote the safe and
    responsible development of A.I. here at home, we are also supporting
    Biden Administration efforts with likeminded allies and partners who
    share our values, such as anti-discrimination, privacy, and human
    rights.
        The CHIPS and Science Act passed Congress to boost U.S.
    semiconductor and advanced technology manufacturing and
    competitiveness--specifically as it relates to China. In your
    testimony, you explain that the CHIPS and Science Act's success will be
    judged on two key criteria:

      1)  Whether the program enabled us to build a more resilient
            semiconductor industry.

      2)  Whether the Department of Commerce was a good steward of taxpayer
            dollars.

        Those are two fair metrics, both of which align with Congress's
    intent in passing CHIPS. However, there have been ancillary policies
    included during implementation that do not align with congressional
    intent. For example:

       Requirements that applicants requesting more than $150
            million provide on-or near-site child care.

       Requirements that applicants requesting more than $150
            million describe their plans to provide ``adult care,''
            transportation assistance, housing assistance, and ``emergency
            cash assistance.''

       Requiring applicants to detail how they will hire
            ``individuals whose ability or opportunity to compete in the
            economy has been impaired due to . . . racial or ethnic
            prejudice or cultural bias within American society.''

       Favoring applicants who commit to pursuing ``environmental
            justice'' and use 100 percent renewable energy for facility
            operations.

        Each of these requirements come straight from your Department's
    Notice of Funding Opportunity (``NOFO''). None appear anywhere in the
    text of the legislation as passed by Congress, and ultimately each is
    likely to make the U.S. less competitive in manufacturing
    semiconductors and other advanced technologies--not to mention
    potentially freezing out applicants from rural areas that are less
    developed.
        This has become a pattern with this Administration: Congress comes
    together to pass carefully negotiated bipartisan legislation like the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, the Safer Communities Act, and the
    CHIPS Act, and then during implementation, executive agencies add on
    any number of partisan wish list items that stood no chance of making
    it through the legislative process.

        Question 1. Can you cite to where in the statute gives the Dept. of
    Commerce the authority to require each of the bulleted examples above?

        Question 2. Do you think that this sort of bait-and-switch,
    legislating from the agencies, is dis-incentivizing bipartisanship?

        Question 3. How can you assure Congress that any authority given to
    the Dept. of Commerce will not be utilized as a partisan policy vehicle
    during implementation?
        Answer. The Department is committed to successfully implementing
    the CHIPS for America Program and doing so in accordance with the
    authorities provided by Congress in the CHIPS and Science Act. To that
    end, the Department issued its first notice of funding opportunity
    (NOFO), CHIPS Incentives Program--Commercial Fabrication Facilities, on
    February 28, 2023. Each of the Program requirements outlined in the
    NOFO, including those provided in your question, is supported by the
    CHIPS Act and is necessary to ensure the long-term success of the CHIPS
    for America Program. The CHIPS Act requires that the Secretary only
    approve an application if the Secretary ``determines that the project
    to which the application relates is in the economic and national
    security interests of the United States.'' It is not only appropriate
    but necessary for the Secretary to establish requirements to properly
    make that required determination. Additionally, among other provisions,
    the CHIPS Act provides that applicants must demonstrate that they have
    ``made commitments to worker and community investment'' including
    ``programs to expand employment opportunity for economically
    disadvantaged individuals'' and documented ``workforce needs and
    developed a strategy to meet such workforce needs consistent with the
    commitments.'' The CHIPS Act also provides that applicants must
    demonstrate ``an executable plan to sustain the facility'' without
    additional Federal financial assistance and ``to identify and mitigate
    relevant semiconductor supply chain security risks, such as risks
    associated with access, availability, confidentiality, integrity, and a
    lack of geographic diversification in the covered entity's supply
    chain.'' The Department is also required to ``increase participation of
    and outreach to economically disadvantaged individuals, minority-owned
    businesses, veteran-owned businesses, and women-owned businesses.''
        Ultimately, our application process is rigorous and not driven by
    any one requirement. Advancing our economic and national security is
    the primary lens through which we are evaluating applications. First
    and foremost, we are looking for projects that advance U.S. economic
    and national security. Among other things, we are looking at whether
    projects build sustainable domestic capacity that reduces U.S. reliance
    on vulnerable or overly concentrated production. If an applicant cannot
    make a case for how its project promotes economic and national
    security, it will not receive funding. The Department also laid out
    five additional criteria that it will use to evaluate projects,
    including a project's commercial viability, an applicant's financial
    strength, and an applicant's commitment to workforce development. It is
    vitally important that our funding contributes to the creation of good-
    paying jobs and long-term, inclusive economic growth. Other criteria we
    weigh include project technical feasibility and readiness, as well as
    broader community impacts. This includes assessments of environmental
    risk and the effects of climate change.
        We also want to clarify the characterization of some of the
    requirements you listed. With respect to the statement that the
    Department requires that applicants requesting more than $150 million
    describe their plans to provide ``adult care, transportation
    assistance, housing assistance, and emergency cash assistance,'' all
    applicants are asked to note the wraparound services they and their
    partners will provide to help retain and attract workers. There is not
    a requirement that companies provide the services described, but rather
    that the applicant notes what services they plan to provide to increase
    access to training and employment opportunities. With respect to the
    statement that the Department is ``Requiring applicants to detail how
    they will hire `individuals whose ability or opportunity to compete in
    the economy has been impaired due to. . .racial or ethnic prejudice or
    cultural bias within American society','' the Department notes that
    this is one category of ``economically disadvantaged individuals.'' The
    CHIPS Act text states that ``It is the sense of Congress that, in
    carrying out subsection (a), the Secretary should allocate funds in a
    manner that--. . . (6) promotes the inclusion of economically
    disadvantaged individuals and small businesses.'' To satisfy this
    element of the legislation, the Department has asked applicants to
    ``develop an equity strategy, in concert with their partners, to create
    equitable workforce pathways for economically disadvantaged individuals
    in their region.'' (NOFO, page 21)
                                     ______

      Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Marsha Blackburn to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
        Question 1. Will you commit to working with Secretary Yellen to
    develop a final rule to implement the section 48D credit with a
    definition of semiconductor that includes semiconductor-grade
    polysilicon?
        Answer. Commerce and Treasury are coordinating closely on the
    investment tax credit (ITC) to ensure that incentives are complementary
    and advance our shared economic and national security goals. The
    Treasury Department is in the lead of implementing the CHIPS ITC and
    continues working to publish its final rule.

        Question 2. I'm concerned that potential CHIPS Act R&D dollars will
    go towards projects who associated intellectual property is mainly
    based overseas. I believe it is essential that companies utilizing U.S.
    taxpayer dollars should conduct most of their R&D in the U.S.

        a. How are you working with applicants to ensure valued R&D and
    intellectual property is housed and based in the U.S.?

        b. What more can Congress do to incentivize U.S.-based R&D?
        Answer. The Department takes seriously its obligation to promote
    U.S. manufacturing, economic competitiveness, and national security
    goals, including in the execution of its research and development
    programs. Recent publications have reiterated this commitment to
    potential applicants for R&D funds. For instance, the November 2023
    vision paper for the National Advanced Packaging Manufacturing Program
    articulated our goal of establishing a ``a vibrant, self-sustaining,
    profitable, high-volume, onshore packaging industry where advanced node
    chips manufactured in the United States are packaged in the United
    States.'' The paper also articulated that accelerating critical
    innovations in advanced packaging to U.S. manufacturing entities is a
    program mission.
        CHIPS for America, in concert with relevant groups throughout the
    Department, is reviewing best practices and developing protocols to
    both protect intellectual property and to encourage domestic production
    and commercialization.
        Within the CHIPS Program Office, which intends to fund R&D
    facilities, the national security guardrails will help ensure CHIPS
    investments enhance global supply chain resilience in coordination with
    allies and partners and will promote U.S. leadership in designing and
    building important semiconductor technologies. In the final rule, the
    Department is implementing two national security guardrails: 1) an
    expansion clawback that limits the expansion of semiconductor
    manufacturing in foreign countries of concern; and 2) a technology
    clawback that limits joint research or technology licensing efforts
    with foreign entities of concern.
        The final rule strikes a balance between limiting activities that
    are inconsistent with the national security goals of the CHIPS Act and
    the desire not to unduly disrupt the existing semiconductor ecosystem.
    To prevent circumvention of the Technology Clawback while allowing for
    greater flexibility in enforcement, the final rule limits direct
    application of the Technology Clawback to just the covered entity but
    allows the Department to impose additional conditions on ``related
    entities'' of the covered entity with respect to joint research and
    technology licensing. A related entity is any entity that directly, or
    indirectly through one or more intermediaries, controls or is
    controlled by, or is under common control with, the covered entity. We
    will document these relationships and joint research and technology
    activities in the agreement with the covered entity. In contrast to the
    mandatory clawback of the Technology Clawback, Commerce will have
    flexibility to take appropriate remedial measures, including imposing a
    mitigation agreement, if the additional conditions are violated.

        Question 3. How are you coordinating your activities with the
    national laboratories? What are the potential areas for collaboration
    with the national laboratories?
        Answer. There are potential areas for collaboration with national
    laboratories in critical and emerging technologies, such as with AI,
    biotechnology, quantum information science, and energy technologies.
    For example, in quantum, activities with national laboratories are
    overseen by the Department of Energy (DOE), and coordination happens
    through the National Science and Technology Council Subcommittee on
    Quantum Information Science (SCQIS) with support by the National
    Quantum Coordination Office (NQCO). The NQCO carries out the daily
    activities needed for supporting the National Quantum Initiative; NIST
    details a researcher to that office. As an example of this
    coordination, Commerce hosted the SCQIS's annual Quantum Information
    Science Program Day at the Hoover Building in September 2023. The event
    is an annual government-only meeting that brings together program
    managers, researchers, and stakeholders from across the U.S. Government
    to coordinate and discuss programs, projects, and directions for
    Quantum Information Science research and development (R&D) across the
    Federal government.
        As a consequence of these coordination activities in quantum, NIST
    has a number of collaborative projects with researchers at national
    laboratories, on topics such as advancing quantum computing and its
    applications, the use of quantum-enhanced sensing for applications in
    high-energy physics, new approaches to quantum networking, and
    development of integrated photonics for quantum (a key enabling
    technology). NIST will also closely coordinate with the Department of
    Energy on actions in response to President Biden's Executive Order on
    Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial
    Intelligence. This will include developing and ensuring availability of
    testing environments such as AI model evaluation tools and AI testbeds
    to support the development of safe, secure, and trustworthy AI
    technologies. NIST is working with DOE to utilize their advanced
    compute architecture for testing and evaluating computationally
    intensive AI algorithms such as large language models (LLMs).

        Question 4. I'm concerned that much of the advanced packaging of
    semiconductors is done in China.

        a. How much of this is being done in China?

        b. What are you doing to reduce the costs and regulatory barriers
    of this innovation in the U.S.?
        Answer. While China accounts for a notable share of overall
    packaging of semiconductors--representing approximately 20 percent of
    chips sold by U.S.-based companies--a small share of this is advanced
    packaging. Much of the world's advanced packaging is carried out by the
    three major providers of cutting-edge semiconductor fabrication: Taiwan
    Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), Samsung, and Intel. Most
    packaging for these companies is carried out outside China, with
    Intel's advanced packaging facilities located in Malaysia and in the
    United States, where it is investing an additional $3.5 billion to
    expand its Rio Rancho, New Mexico advanced packaging facility.
        On November 20, 2023, CHIPS for America released ``The Vision for
    the National Advanced Packaging Manufacturing Program'', which outlined
    its intent to ``establish a vibrant, self-sustaining, profitable, high-
    volume, onshore packaging industry where advanced node chips
    manufactured in the United States are packaged in the United States.''
    The Vision paper further recognized the need to establish domestic
    advanced packaging manufacturing capabilities that are cost-effective
    and efficient. To achieve these goals, CHIPS for America envisions
    investing in four technology areas--materials and substrates;
    equipment, tools, and processes; power delivery and thermal management;
    and photonics and connectors--as well as two ecosystem areas--chiplets
    and co-design--as well as in a physical piloting facility.

        Question 5. Most of the funding for the Public Wireless Supply
    Chain Innovation Fund has gone to academic institutions. What steps is
    Commerce specifically taking to support commercial wireless deployment?
        Answer. The CHIPS and Science Act funded the Public Wireless Supply
    Chain Innovation Fund, administered by the National Telecommunications
    and Information Administration (NTIA). The $1.5 billion Innovation Fund
    supports the development of open and interoperable wireless networks.
    This grant program will help drive wireless innovation, foster
    competition, and strengthen supply chain resilience. It will also help
    unlock opportunities for innovation and competition in a market
    historically dominated by a few suppliers, including high-risk
    suppliers that raise security concerns.
        In April 2023, the Department announced its first Notice of Funding
    Opportunity under the Innovation Fund, making $140.5 million available
    to demonstrate the viability of new approaches to wireless, such as
    open radio access networks (Open RAN). The Department received more
    than 120 applications for the first round of funding. On February 12,
    2024, the Department announced the fourth and final round of funding
    from this first Notice of Funding Opportunity, with an award of $42.3
    million. This grant will fund a project by a consortium of U.S.
    carriers, foreign carriers, universities and equipment suppliers to
    establish a testing, evaluation, and research and development (R&D)
    center along with a satellite facility. Previous rounds of funding
    supported R&D as well as testing and evaluation activities, including
    grants to U.S. carriers and equipment suppliers that establish new
    testbeds. These investments will make industry-standard testing more
    accessible to new market players and encourage greater collaboration
    within the wireless industry.
        NTIA is committed to working with for-profit companies, trade
    groups, civil society, non-profit corporations, and academia to
    facilitate the development and deployment of open and interoperable,
    standards-based telecommunications networks in communities across
    America, including in rural areas.
        We anticipate a second Notice of Funding Opportunity to be issued
    in Spring 2024.

        Question 6. What is the Department of Commerce doing to incentivize
    research to commercialization of Quantum technologies?
        Answer. The Department of Commerce incentivizes research to
    commercialization of Quantum technologies by supporting research that
    continues to advance both the technologies and fundamental science
    needed to expand quantum applications; by supporting the quantum
    ecosystem through engagement with quantum institutes such as the
    Quantum Economic Development Consortium (QED-C) and its 170+ corporate
    participants; through Cooperative Research and Development Agreements
    (CRADAs) with individual companies to help them with particular
    technical challenges; and by supporting workforce development
    activities, such as those at NIST joint institutes: Joint Quantum
    Institute, Joint Center for Quantum Information and Computer Science,
    and JILA. NIST also partners with several National Science Foundation
    (NSF) and DOE national quantum centers, such as NSF's Quantum Systems
    through Entangled Science and Engineering (Q-SEnSE) and DOE's Quantum
    Systems Accelerator (QSA). These Centers include activities for
    transitioning research to industry, such as engineering partnerships to
    enable field deployment of technologies. As an indicator of Department
    of Commerce success in incentivizing quantum research to
    commercialization, a wide range of NIST quantum technologies is now
    being commercialized. For example, in quantum computing, NIST
    superconducting circuits, microfabricated ion traps, optical tweezer
    arrays, and single-photon technologies are now being used in state-of-
    the-art quantum information processor chips. This tech transfer is the
    result of decades of world-leading basic quantum information science at
    NIST and is being sustained by a robust flow of NIST research
    associates (students and postdocs) to quantum companies.
        On October 23, 2023, the Economic Development Administration (EDA)
    announced the winners of Tech Hubs Phase 1 and posted the Notice of
    Funding Opportunity for Phase 2. This announcement included 31
    designated Tech Hubs across 32 states and Puerto Rico, as well as the
    29 consortia that will receive Strategy Development Grants. The 31 Tech
    Hubs focus on developing and growing innovative industries in regions
    across the country, including semiconductors, clean energy, critical
    minerals, biotechnology, precision medicine, artificial intelligence,
    quantum computing, and more. Two designated Tech Hubs, Elevate Quantum
    Colorado and Chicago's The Bloch Tech Hub, will primarily focus their
    regional technology-centric development strategies on the advancement
    of quantum technologies.

        Question 7. How are you evaluating potential applicants'
    contribution to keep the U.S. in a leadership position in semiconductor
    technology? For instance, how are you weighing a company who performs
    and keeps its R&D and intellectual property here in the U.S. versus
    others?
        Answer. The evaluation criteria for each funding opportunity will
    reflect relevant policies and best practices--including those already
    in effect at agencies with a similar mandate--to improve U.S. economic
    and national security, as well as relevant policies used to award CHIPS
    Incentives. The evaluation criteria will also incorporate relevant
    policies and best practices from previous NIST funding opportunities,
    such as technical merit and innovativeness of the proposed work.

        Question 8. Can you tell me how you will prioritize the importance
    of actual commercialization and time-to-market at the new Manufacturing
    USA Institutes?
        Answer. Manufacturing USA institutes bridge the gap from discovery
    to production and help ensure that U.S. inventions get out of the labs
    and are translated into products that are manufactured in the United
    States. Seventeen institutes make up the Manufacturing USA National
    Network, on technologies such as additive manufacturing (America Makes)
    and biomanufacturing (NIIMBL). In 2022, the Institutes worked with more
    than 2,500 member organizations, collaborated on over 650 R&D projects,
    and engaged over 100,000 people in workforce development. All
    Manufacturing USA institutes accelerate time to market for innovation
    needed for industrial competitiveness, including through a focus on
    Education and Workforce Development to ensure that there are skilled
    workers to deploy the technology and benefit from well-compensated
    advanced manufacturing jobs.
        CHIPS Manufacturing USA Institute Objectives--CHIPS R&D expects
    that the NOFO soliciting proposals will seek to achieve the following
    objectives:

      1.  Significantly reduce U.S. chip development and manufacturing
            costs, such as by improving capacity planning, optimizing
            production, and enabling real-time process adjustments.

      2.  Improve development cycle time and accelerate adoption of
            innovative semiconductor manufacturing technologies, including
            breakthrough tools, manufacturing equipment, materials, and
            manufacturing processes validated at the shared facility.

      3.  Advance digital twin-enabled curricula and best practices for
            training the semiconductor workforce nationwide.

      4.  Create a digital twin marketplace for industry, including
            entrepreneurs, to access digital models and manufacturing
            process flows and to de-risk digital twin development and
            implementation.

        CHIPS R&D expects to solicit proposals demonstrating strong
    industry leadership capable of catalyzing collaboration in software
    development relevant to digital twins (including but not limited to
    electronic design automation tools), semiconductor manufacturing,
    advanced packaging, and assembly. Expected activities include
    establishing a shared physical facility where companies can experiment
    while protecting proprietary information; enabling industry-relevant
    research projects; leveraging a shared marketplace that enables data
    aggregation across companies, while protecting proprietary data, to
    make powerful digital twins available at low cost; and operating an
    education and workforce development program, which may include
    partnerships with educational institutions.

        Question 9. Please give me an update on the National Manufacturing
    Extension Partnership (MEP) Supply Chain Database Act.
        Answer. The CHIPS and Science Act directs NIST to establish a
    voluntary National Supply Chain Database. This directive did not
    include any appropriations. The Manufacturing Extension Partnership
    (MEP) Network has Centers in all 50 states and in Puerto Rico. Each
    Center is a partnership between the Federal government and a variety of
    public or private entities, including state, university, and nonprofit
    organizations. Over the last several years, the MEP National Network
    has actively engaged with the manufacturing industry, resulting in over
    54,000 completed projects with more than 23,000 different manufacturing
    clients, leading to $47.6 billion in sales (new and retained), $7.2B
    billion in cost savings, $16.8 billion in new client investments, and
    in turn, helped create or retain more than 346,000 jobs.
        With the enacted funding in Fiscal Year (FY) 2023, MEP invested
    $20.4 million in its Centers across the country to initiate the Supply
    Chain Optimization and Intelligence Network (SCOIN) and identify
    vulnerabilities and gaps in the current manufacturing ecosystem as part
    of the MEP Expansion Awards Pilot Program (MEAPP). The SCOIN has
    enabled the MEP National Network to employ over 60 supply chain experts
    across the country, to focus on mapping and assessing manufacturers in
    aerospace; defense; biomanufacturing; and clean energy sectors. The MEP
    National Network Supplier Scouting service has received 130 requests to
    find an American supplier of a product or technology needed in a
    domestic supply chain. To date, 40 unique manufacturing companies have
    been identified as exact matches for the requestors.

        Question 10. What can we do to expedite regulatory approval and
    reviews for businesses engaged in the semiconductors supply chain? Its
    my understanding South Korea does this well.
        Answer. The Commerce Department's CHIPS Program Office's second
    Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), released September 29, 2023,
    seeks applications for smaller-scale projects involving the
    construction, expansion, or modernization of semiconductor materials
    and manufacturing equipment facilities for which the capital investment
    falls below $300 million. These applicants play a vital role in
    producing the inputs necessary for producing semiconductors in the
    United States, support our domestic manufacturing ecosystem, and create
    jobs and opportunities in communities across the country. These
    projects will produce the equipment, chemicals, gases, and other
    materials that are critical to manufacturing semiconductors in America.
    The Department seeks to move as fast as possible, is asking for concept
    plans by February 1, 2024, and then will move quickly to select
    applicants for the full application phase. The timeline of funds going
    out the door will ultimately depend on the strength of applications and
    projects, but we need to get this done right because it is a national
    security imperative to the United States. We understand we are asking
    for a lot of information, and the information we are requesting is
    essential to our ability to get these applications processed
    efficiently.

        Question 11. In 2022, OSTP published a Draft National Strategy on
    Microelectronics Research. The national laboratories responded to the
    draft strategy to address potential gaps, but haven't seen a final
    version of the strategy. Do you know the status of the final version of
    this plan and whether the strategy is informing execution of the CHIPS
    act?
        Answer. The OSTP Subcommittee for Microelectronics Leadership
    (SML), which released the draft National Strategy on Microelectronics
    Research along with a Request for Information (RFI), consists of
    representatives from all departments and agencies with responsibilities
    under the CHIPS Act.
        The SML has made further progress since publication of the draft.
    For instance, SML carefully reviewed the extensive RFI feedback and
    presented the draft strategy to the Industrial Advisory Committee
    (IAC). SML then incorporated feedback from the RFI and the IAC. The
    interagency is currently finalizing the document based on these inputs
    and on a formal interagency review and clearance process. The active
    participation and engagement by representatives from multiple
    departments and agencies in strategy development and their continued
    collaboration in strategy review and implementation will inform
    execution of the individual CHIPS Act provisions, helping ensure the
    full leveraging of individual agency efforts.

        Question 12. Please tell me how you will prioritize EDA Tech Hub
    partnerships to produce faster routes from research to actual
    commercialization?
        Answer. On October 23, 2023, the Department of Commerce's Economic
    Development Administration announced the designation of 31 Tech Hubs in
    regions across the country. This economic development initiative is
    designed to drive regional innovation and create jobs by strengthening
    a region's capacity to manufacture, commercialize, and deploy
    technology.
        The Tech Hubs program will help develop and grow innovative
    industries in diverse regions of the country in industries ranging from
    semiconductors to clean energy, critical minerals, biotechnology,
    artificial intelligence, and more. Tech Hubs will bring the benefits
    and opportunities of scientific and technological innovation to
    communities across the country, with nearly one-quarter located in
    small or rural areas and more than three-fourths directly supporting
    historically underserved communities. Tech Hubs consortia bring
    together private industry, state and local governments, institutions of
    higher education, labor unions, Tribal communities, nonprofits, and
    more to compete for approximately $40-70 million in Phase 2
    implementation grants to further develop these fields and make
    transformative investments in innovative industries.
        The 31 designated Tech Hubs, located across 32 states and Puerto
    Rico, will leverage existing talent, resources, and assets to mature
    critical and emerging technology sectors, while advancing equitable
    growth. Of the Designated Tech Hubs, 14 include states that have
    historically received lower levels of Federal research dollars.
        In Phase 1, a critical application evaluation criterion was the
    potential for a region to achieve global competitiveness in its
    selected technology focus area over the next decade. EDA evaluated
    innovation assets, market opportunity, and the region's capacity to
    commercialize emerging technologies. In Phase 2, EDA will evaluate
    proposed projects' ability to deliver on that technology-based
    potential to achieve global competitiveness. Additionally, EDA has and
    will continue to work across the Department of Commerce and Federal
    agencies, such as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, to identify
    Federal resources to support Tech Hubs' regional and technology
    development and commercialization.
                                     ______

         Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Todd Young to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
        The CHIPS Program Office has indicated that it will outline funding
    opportunities for ``commercial'' R&D facilities later this year. The
    statute defines covered entities eligible for 9902 funds to include
    nonprofit entities but there is no statutory limitation on 9902 funds
    to commercial research facilities. In Indiana, Purdue University is
    pursuing an expansion of its research facilities and bringing world-
    leading semiconductor research institutions such as IMEC to the area,
    and I want to ensure 9902 funds are available to them, consistent with
    the statute.

        Question 1. Can you confirm that the Department will open an
    opportunity for nonprofit and non-commercial research facilities to
    apply for 9902 incentive funds, in addition to 9906 funds, consistent
    with the statute?

        Question 2. When is such an opportunity expected to open?
        Answer. As with past funding opportunities, the CHIPS Program
    Office is developing its funding opportunity for R&D facilities
    consistent with the statute and the program's economic and national
    security objectives. We expect to release this funding opportunity in
    the months ahead.

        Huawei recently unveiled a new smartphone with a chip that some
    have said is unlikely to have been possible to be produced without U.S.
    technology.

        Question 1. Are you concerned about the possibility that Huawei
    used U.S. technology to produce a chip for their new smartphone?

        Question 2. I've heard you say before that it's the Biden
    Administration's policy that no further licenses for chip sales were to
    be granted to Huawei, but do older licenses still exist?

        Question 3. If so, are you concerned about existing licenses?
        Answer. Placing foreign companies on the Entity List allows the
    U.S. government to control their access to U.S. technology, including
    commercial products. The Entity List is not an embargo--it is a
    regulatory tool to assess export transactions involving parties that
    have been added to the Entity List for various reasons. The policy for
    reviewing license applications for each party is public and determined
    by the Departments of Commerce, Defense, State, and Energy based on
    national security and foreign policy considerations.
        Since 2019, Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. (Huawei) and many of its
    affiliates have been on the Commerce Department's Entity List and are
    subject to the Foreign-Produced Direct Product Rule (Foreign Direct
    Product, or FDP, Rule), which imposes a license requirement on the
    export to Huawei of any foreign-produced items that are the direct
    product of certain U.S. technology or software or produced by any plant
    or major component of a plant that is located outside the United
    States. The licensing policy outlined in Huawei's Entity Listing
    provides for case-by-case review of applications for the export of
    items that support technologies below the 5G-level, and a presumption
    of denial for all other items subject to the EAR. Any license
    applications approved for exports to Huawei since 2019 were approved
    according to these guidelines based on the national security
    assessments, and concurrence, of Commerce as well as our interagency
    partners. As Under Secretary Estevez has testified before Congress,
    Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) is engaging in an ongoing
    assessment of BIS's export control policies related to the PRC and
    calibrating them based on the evolving dynamics of the threat
    environment. BIS has made a number of changes in the past year to
    respond to national security concerns presented by the PRC, including
    the imposition of new controls on advanced semiconductor manufacturing
    equipment and related items, controls on software and components for
    the production of advanced semiconductors, and others.
        Huawei remains on the Entity List and no changes to its licensing
    policy have been made at this time. However, we continue to assess, as
    noted above, all policies related to exports to the PRC, and Huawei
    licensing is included in that review.
        With respect to reports regarding the new Huawei phone, the
    Department cannot comment on any law enforcement matters, but
    allegations of violations of our export licensing rules are
    investigated diligently and enforced appropriately. The Department of
    Commerce is working to obtain more information on the character and
    composition of the purported 7 nanometer chip in the Huawei smartphone.
    The restrictions in place since 2019 knocked Huawei down and forced it
    to reinvent itself--at a substantial cost to the company and Chinese
    government. The Department is continually working to assess and, when
    appropriate, update our controls based on the dynamic threat
    environment and we will not hesitate to take appropriate action to
    protect U.S. national security--as we did with the rules issued on
    October 7, 2022, which applied China-wide restrictions on high-end
    chips, semiconductor manufacturing equipment, and other items, and
    updated and strengthened on October 17, 2023. These controls apply PRC-
    wide, and apply to Huawei.
        More specifically, the October 7, 2022 advanced computing and
    semiconductor equipment rule issued by BIS imposed restrictions on the
    PRC's access to certain advanced semiconductor manufacturing equipment,
    chips and other items needed to develop AI and prohibited U.S. persons
    from supporting chip development and production that power AI systems
    at certain semiconductor fabrication facilities located in the PRC or
    Macau without a license.
        On October 17, 2023, BIS released a package of rules designed to
    update export controls on advanced computing semiconductors and
    semiconductor manufacturing equipment, as well as items that support
    supercomputing applications and end-uses, to arms embargoed countries,
    including the PRC, and to place additional Chinese entities on the
    Entity List. These rules reinforce the October 7, 2022, controls to
    restrict the PRC's ability to both purchase and manufacture certain
    high-end chips critical for military advantage.
        The Advanced Computing Chips Interim Final Rule retains the
    stringent PRC-wide licensing requirements imposed in the October 7,
    2022, rule and makes two categories of updates by: 1) adjusting the
    parameters that determine whether an advanced computing chip is
    restricted; and 2) imposing new measures to address risks of
    circumvention of the controls.
        The Expansion of Export Controls on Semiconductor Manufacturing
    Items Interim Final Rule: 1) imposes controls on additional types of
    semiconductor manufacturing equipment; 2) refines and better focuses
    the U.S. persons restrictions while codifying previously existing
    agency guidance, to ensure U.S. companies cannot provide support to
    advanced PRC semiconductor manufacturing while avoiding unintended
    impacts; and 3) expands license requirements for semiconductor
    manufacturing equipment to apply to additional countries beyond the PRC
    and Macau, to 21 other countries for which the U.S. maintains an arms
    embargo.
        Restrictions on the highest end semiconductors and manufacturing
    equipment on a China-wide basis, and restrictions on a host of PRC
    supercomputing, AI chip development, tool manufacturers and others have
    further restricted not just Huawei's ability to obtain these items, but
    firms throughout the PRC semiconductor ecosystem. The Department of
    Commerce is working to obtain more information on the character and
    composition of the purported 7 nanometer chip in the Huawei smartphone.
        Export controls are just one tool in the U.S. government's toolbox
    to address the national security threats presented by the People's
    Republic of China (PRC). The restrictions on Huawei in place since 2019
    have impaired Huawei and forced it to reinvent itself--at a substantial
    cost to the PRC government.

        On September 26 and 27, the NIST R&D Office held its first summit
    to further semiconductor industry standards development.

        Question 1. How is the Department of Commerce getting small
    businesses involved in standards development and alleviating any
    concerns about IP and data sharing?

        Question 2. Will CHIPS R&D dollars go to improve data transparency
    and trackability?
        Answer. The Standards Summit was the first step in the CHIPS R&D
    strategy to enable industry leadership in standards development. More
    than 330 companies participated in the Summit, including a broad
    spectrum of small businesses and startups.
        The next step is a standards workshop series focused on standards
    priorities identified in the Standards Summit. These hybrid workshops
    are open to all and provide opportunities for experts from academia and
    industry, including small businesses, to provide direct input into
    technical foundations for standards needed by industry. The first two
    workshops took place the week of December 11, 2023, and focused on
    chiplets interfaces and digital twin for semiconductor manufacturing
    and supply chain assurance. More than 500 people registered for these
    workshops, including representatives from a broad range of small and
    medium enterprises. This continuing workshop series provides an easily
    accessible venue for small businesses nationwide to introduce their
    ideas and interests and guide CHIPS R&D standards development
    processes. Within this workshop series, we expect to cover approaches
    to managing IP while enabling appropriate data sharing.
        Participants in the CHIPS R&D Standards Summit identified
    establishing data-sharing standards--which can foster collaboration,
    enhance product consistency, protect equipment, and ensure high-quality
    manufacturing outputs--as a top priority area. They further recommended
    that CHIPS for America help define standardized data sharing taxonomies
    and explore data types that can be shared without compromising company
    equities. CHIPS for America will explore the potential for establishing
    this as a topic of one of its upcoming technical standards workshops.

        One of the key provisions of the CHIPS and Science Act is the
    Regional Technology and Innovation Hubs program.

        Question 1. Can you assure me that, given limited resources
    currently, existing implementation dollars available for Phase Two of
    the Tech Hubs application process will be spread equitably across EDA
    regions?
        Answer. On October 23, 2023, the Department of Commerce's Economic
    Development Administration (EDA), announced the designation of 31 Tech
    Hubs in regions across the country. This economic development
    initiative is designed to drive regional innovation and create jobs by
    strengthening a region's capacity to manufacture, commercialize, and
    deploy technologies that support economic and national security.
        The Tech Hubs program will help develop and grow innovative
    industries in all regions of the country in industries ranging from
    semiconductors to clean energy, critical minerals, biotechnology,
    artificial intelligence, and more. Tech Hubs will bring the benefits
    and opportunities of scientific and technological innovation to
    communities across the country, with nearly one-quarter located in
    small or rural areas and more than three-fourths directly supporting
    historically underserved communities. They bring together private
    industry, state and local governments, institutions of higher
    education, labor unions, Tribal communities, nonprofits, and more to
    compete for approximately $40-70 million in implementation grants to
    further develop these fields and make transformative investments in
    innovative industries. The 31 designated Tech Hubs, located across 32
    states and Puerto Rico, will leverage existing talent, resources, and
    assets to mature critical and emerging technology sectors, while
    advancing equitable growth.
        Geographic diversity is an explicit objective of the Tech Hubs
    Program. By statute, there are certain geographic requirements for
    Phase 1 awards, including the requirements that at least three
    designated Tech Hubs in each EDA region, at least one third of
    designated Tech Hubs significantly benefit small and rural communities,
    along with required geographic distribution of Strategy Development
    Grants. Tech Hubs considered and met these requirements and the
    explicit geographic diversity intent of the program in its merit review
    of Phase 1 applications.
        While there are no statutory requirements for the geographic
    distribution of Phase 2 Implementation Grants, geographic diversity
    will be among our priorities in the execution of Phase 2.

        Ensuring U.S. artificial intelligence leadership depends on our
    ability to bring advanced packaging onshore and advanced packaging has
    been identified as a critical area of need for a healthy semiconductor
    ecosystem.

        Question 1. What types of applicants best meet our advanced
    packaging needs?

        Question 2. Since there is virtually no packaging done in the U.S.,
    do you feel confident in our ability to onshore these technologies?
        Answer. The National Advanced Packaging Manufacturing Program
    (NAPMP) will establish programs that ensure the U.S. is a global leader
    in advanced packaging, assembly, and testing. The program will provide
    strategic support to grow key technology areas such as chiplets and
    heterogeneous integration through industry partnerships, advanced pilot
    facilities, and workforce training and development, to realize U.S.
    based manufacturing.
        On November 20, 2023, CHIPS for America released ``The Vision for
    the National Advanced Packaging Manufacturing Program,'' which outlined
    its intent to ``establish a vibrant, self-sustaining, profitable, high-
    volume, onshore packaging industry where advanced node chips
    manufactured in the United States are packaged in the United States.''
    To achieve this goal, CHIPS for America envisions investing in four
    technology areas--materials and substrates; equipment, tools, and
    processes; power delivery and thermal management; and photonics and
    connectors--as well as two ecosystem areas--chiplets and co-design--as
    well as in a physical piloting facility. As explained in the paper,
    NAPMP aims to leverage existing areas of U.S. strength, including in
    semiconductor design, manufacturing equipment, and R&D expertise.
        CHIPS for America will publish evaluation criteria in individual
    NAPMP funding opportunities.
                                     ______

    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Shelley Moore Capito to

                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
    Supply Chain
        America can never be replaced as the global economic and innovation
    leader which is why I was proud to support the CHIPS and Science Act
    because winning the future means making the necessary investments to
    address issues like the microchip shortage, prepare the next generation
    of workers in science and technology fields, and keep up with our
    competitors.

        Question 1. While implementing regulations, will you make sure the
    full supply chain is supported? More specifically, can you commit to
    saying that taxpayer-funded semiconductor plants won't use Chinese
    materials or packaging, and can't be shut down by Chinese coercion?
        Answer. The national security guardrails will help ensure CHIPS
    investments enhance global supply chain resilience in coordination with
    allies and partners and will promote U.S. leadership in designing and
    building important semiconductor technologies. In the final rule, the
    Department is implementing two national security guardrails: 1) an
    expansion clawback that limits the expansion of semiconductor
    manufacturing in foreign countries of concern; and 2) a technology
    clawback that limits joint research or technology licensing efforts
    with foreign entities of concern. The guardrails cover investments in
    wafer fabrication, front-end semiconductor fabrication and packaging
    facilities, but do not apply to toolmaking facilities or facilities
    producing materials for semiconductor production. The guardrails
    prohibit most expansion of existing facilities in foreign countries of
    concern. In recognition that some potential applicants for CHIPS
    Incentives may have existing facilities in foreign countries of
    concern, and to minimize potential supply chain disruptions, the CHIPS
    Act allows for certain transactions involving mature (legacy)
    semiconductor manufacturing in a foreign country of concern. The
    guardrails set limits on any expansion of legacy or advanced
    facilities. The guardrails limit the expansion of legacy facilities to
    ten percent. Advanced facilities can expand by no more than five
    percent. The final rule ties expanded semiconductor manufacturing to
    the addition of cleanroom or other physical space or production lines
    that result in expanding the facility's production capacity by the
    applicable percentage. These thresholds are intended to capture most
    transactions attempting to expand manufacturing capacity, yet still
    allow for ordinary course-of-business tool replacements and upgrades.
    The final rule strikes a balance between limiting activities that are
    inconsistent with the national security goals of the CHIPS Act and the
    desire not to unduly disrupt the existing semiconductor ecosystem.
        Further the CHIPS Incentives program released a second NOFO on
    September 29th focused squarely on the upstream semiconductor
    manufacturing supply chain for equipment and materials. This designates
    $500 million to support projects with capital expenditures under $300
    million, that onshore and produce the critical inputs to U.S.
    semiconductor fabs. That program was open for concept plan submissions
    from December 1, 2023, through February 1, 2024 and received over 160
    small supplier concept plans. Our strategy is to align the projects we
    see to global commodity risks in order to close as many gaps as
    possible in the domestic supply chain.
    West Virginia Tech Hub
        The Phase 1 applications I have seen submitted for a West Virginia
    Tech Hub are extremely well aligned with the intent of the program. A
    West Virginia Tech Hub would facilitate investment in a diverse
    geographic locality, to unlock industrial technological development in
    new places, as was intended by law. The program requires that at least
    one-third of Tech Hub grants and designations must ``significantly
    benefit a small and rural community''.

        Question 1. Does this mean that every one of three Hub designations
    under Phase 2 will be awarded to rural communities?

        Question 2. Can the Department specify in the Phase 2 NOFO that
    another portion of Phase 2 designations be awarded to a rural state?
        Answer. On October 23, 2023, the Department of Commerce's Economic
    Development Administration (EDA), announced the designation of 31 Tech
    Hubs in regions across the country. This economic development
    initiative is designed to drive regional innovation and create jobs by
    strengthening a region's capacity to manufacture, commercialize, and
    deploy technology.
        The Tech Hubs program will help develop and grow innovative
    industries in all regions of the country in industries ranging from
    semiconductors to clean energy, critical minerals, biotechnology,
    artificial intelligence, and more. Tech Hubs will bring the benefits
    and opportunities of scientific and technological innovation to
    communities across the country, with nearly one-quarter located in
    small or rural areas and more than three-fourths directly supporting
    historically underserved communities. They bring together private
    industry, state and local governments, institutions of higher
    education, labor unions, Tribal communities, nonprofits, and more to
    compete for approximately $40-70 million in implementation grants to
    further develop these fields and make transformative investments in
    innovative industries. The 31 designated Tech Hubs, located across 32
    states and Puerto Rico, will leverage existing talent, resources, and
    assets to mature critical and emerging technology sectors, while
    advancing equitable growth.
        Geographic diversity is an explicit objective of the Tech Hubs
    Program. By statute, there are certain geographic requirements that EDA
    adhered to in their Phase 1 awards, including requirements that at
    least three designated Tech Hubs are in each EDA region, at least one
    third of designated Tech Hubs significantly benefit small and rural
    communities, along with required geographic distribution of Strategy
    Development Grants. Tech Hubs considered these requirements and the
    explicit geographic diversity intent of the program in its merit review
    of Phase 1 applications. In fact, EDA also awarded six Strategy
    Development Grants (SDG) to Appalachian entities, including two from
    West Virginia, to help communities significantly increase local
    coordination and planning activities. Such development could make
    selected grantees more competitive for future Tech Hubs funding
    opportunities.
        While there are no statutory requirements for the geographic
    distribution of Phase 2 Implementation Grants, fostering inclusive
    technology-based economic development across diverse U.S. geographies
    diversity is among EDA's priorities in its implementation of Phase 2.
    BEAD
        I believe my state has been doing a great job so far working on its
    initial proposal for the BEAD program, but one sticking point has been
    related to the financial requirements for providers such as a line of
    credit. I share the concern of having untested providers be part of
    BEAD since I saw how much the BTOP money was wasted back in 2010, but I
    have heard that these financial constraints are difficult even for
    larger proven providers to meet.
        I know that at least one other state is requesting some
    flexibilities as it relates to the financial requirements.

        Question 1. Are you and NTIA open to considering some financial
    requirement flexibilities for providers such as performance bonds or
    less capital-intensive means?
        Answer. As the National Telecommunications and Information
    Administration (NTIA) administers the BEAD Program, we are committed to
    being good stewards of taxpayer dollars. That means making sure BEAD
    Program subgrantees can see their deployment projects through--not just
    to the end of construction, but on an ongoing basis as service
    providers deliver affordable, reliable high-speed Internet service. To
    that end, the NOFO required prospective subgrantees to provide an
    irrevocable standby letter of credit to the Eligible Entity (i.e., the
    50 states, five territories, and the District of Columbia) before
    entering into a subgrantee agreement. The amount of the letter of
    credit must be no less than 25 percent of the subaward amount.\25\ The
    NOFO also invited Eligible Entities to propose alternatives ``if they
    are necessary and sufficient to ensure that the Program's objectives
    are met.'' \26\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \25\ BEAD NOFO at 72, 73.
        \26\ Id. at 71.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        On November 1, 2023, NTIA published a conditional programmatic
    waiver that modifies the letter of credit requirement for subgrantees
    of all Eligible Entities in the following ways:

       Allow Credit Unions to Issue letters of credit. The NOFO
            requires subgrantees to obtain a letter of credit from a U.S.
            bank with a safety rating issued by Weiss of B- or better. The
            waiver permits subgrantees to fulfill the letter of credit
            Requirement (or any alternative permitted under the waiver)
            utilizing any United States credit union that is insured by the
            National Credit Union Administration and that has a credit
            union safety rating issued by Weiss of B- or better.

       Allow Use of Performance Bonds. The waiver permits a
            subgrantee to provide a performance bond equal to 100 percent
            of the BEAD subaward amount in lieu of a letter of credit,
            provided that the bond is issued by a company holding a
            certificate of authority as an acceptable surety on Federal
            bonds as identified in the Department of Treasury Circular 570.

       Allow Eligible Entities to Reduce the Obligation Upon
            Completion of Milestones. The waiver allows an Eligible Entity
            to reduce the amount of the letter of credit obligation below
            25 percent over time, or reduce the amount of the performance
            bond below 100 percent over time, upon a subgrantee meeting
            deployment milestones specified by the Eligible Entity.

       Allow for an Alternative Initial letter of credit or
            Performance Bond Percentage. The NOFO requires that the initial
            amount of the letter of credit be 25 percent of the subaward
            (or the initial amount of the performance bond be 100 percent
            of the subaward under the option described above). The waiver
            allows the initial amount of the letter of credit or
            performance bond to be 10 percent of the subaward amount during
            the entire period of performance when an Eligible Entity issues
            funding on a reimbursable basis consistent with Section
            IV.C.1.b of the NOFO and reimbursement is for periods of no
            more than six months each.

        By providing an expanded universe of potential issuers of letters
    of credit and specific, permissible alternatives to the letter of
    credit requirement, NTIA remains faithful to our objectives of
    encouraging robust participation from a broad range of service
    providers while giving states and territories more ways to ensure that
    grant recipients can build a high-quality network and operate it for
    years to come.
    BEAD High-Cost Threshold
        One concern I have with the BEAD program's NOFO deals with the
    difficulty to get fiber-optic cable to every place in my state. I know
    that is the best and most reliable broadband connection, but it is not
    always practical and I wonder about the standards that will be decided
    between states and NTIA to determine the ``extremely high-cost
    threshold'' for when other technologies can be used.

        Question 1. How do you view this threshold and do you expect to
    accommodate extremely different thresholds among neighboring and
    similar states?
        Answer. There is no ``one-size-fits-all'' approach to broadband
    deployment given each Eligible Entity's unique challenges, and NTIA
    will ensure that the Eligible Entities have flexibility in identifying
    the technical solutions that meet the needs of their communities. In
    many cases, the best solution will be building out high-speed Internet
    using fiber networks.
        The NOFO recognizes the unique characteristics of fiber to ``ensure
    that the network built by the project can easily scale speeds over time
    to . . . meet the evolving connectivity needs of households and
    businesses'' and ``support the deployment of 5G, successor wireless
    technologies, and other advanced services.'' \27\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \27\ IIJA at Sec. 60102(a)(2)(I).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The NOFO creates room for all strategies and we expect Eligible
    Entities will use a mix of technologies to connect their unserved and
    underserved locations. The NOFO allows applicants to propose to provide
    service over any form of reliable broadband service, including
    terrestrial fixed wireless over licensed spectrum in certain
    circumstances. Further, Eligible Entities each have the authority to
    decline to select a Priority Broadband Project proposal ``that requires
    a BEAD subsidy that exceeds the Extremely High Cost Per Location
    Threshold for any location to be served in the proposal if use of an
    alternative Reliable Broadband Service technology meeting the BEAD
    Program's technical requirements would be less expensive.'' \28\ It
    also permits funding of satellite and unlicensed wireless service for
    those locations if there is no other proposal from a provider of
    Reliable Broadband Service.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \28\ BEAD NOFO at 38.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        With respect to the Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold, the
    NOFO states, and NTIA will require, that each Eligible Entity must
    establish its Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold in a manner
    that maximizes use of the best available technology while ensuring that
    the program can meet the prioritization and scoring requirements set
    forth in Section IV.B.6 of the NOFO. We look forward to working with
    each Eligible Entity to help develop an appropriate Extremely High Cost
    Per Location Threshold.
    BEAD Initial Proposals
        BEAD Initial Proposals are due by the end of this year. Just like
    with mapping some states have done better than others. I know my state
    Office of Broadband has done a fantastic job so far, but I wonder what
    will happen if some states submit incomplete proposals.

        Question 1. Are you concerned about some states leaving certain
    requirements in the initial proposal blank or requesting flexibilities
    with some of the requirements that could slow the process down?
        Answer. NTIA will not approve an Eligible Entities' plan if it does
    not meet all requirements of the NOFO and the underlying statute. To
    ensure the success of the program, NTIA conducted thorough and
    individualized technical assistance to all Eligible Entities ahead of
    the December 27, 2023 deadline for Initial Proposal submission. NTIA
    technical assistance staff have worked intensively with every state and
    territory government to ensure its plan is both strong and complaint.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Cynthia Lummis to
                             Hon. Gina M. Raimondo
        Question 1. In July 2023, the Department of Commerce and Department
    of Defense signed a Memorandum of Agreement to strengthen U.S. defense
    industrial base. In addition to this, what is the Department of
    Commerce doing to coordinate with activities at the Department of
    Energy and throughout the Federal government to ensure a robust
    domestic supply of semiconductor minerals and materials, such as
    copper, germanium, tellurium, gallium, nickel, cobalt, and others?
        Answer. Recognizing the national security imperative of investments
    in the domestic semiconductor industry, the Departments of Commerce and
    Defense in July 2023 announced a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to
    expand collaboration to strengthen the U.S. semiconductor defense
    industrial base. The agreement will increase information-sharing
    between the Departments to facilitate close coordination on the CHIPS
    for America's incentives programs, including collaboration on potential
    investment applications to ensure that our departments are making
    complementary decisions that maximize Federal investments under the
    CHIPS Incentive Program and the Department of Defense's (DoD) Defense
    Production Act and Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment funds. This
    alignment of priorities and decision-making will help ensure that our
    respective investments position the U.S. to produce semiconductor chips
    essential to national security and defense programs.
        The Department is in regular communication with Department of
    Energy officials about how best to promote more resilient supply
    chains, especially regarding how the various funding programs can be
    complementary and not duplicative.

        Question 2. In June 2023, the Department of Commerce announced
    funding opportunities for commercial facilities in the United States
    for materials used to manufacture semiconductors and semiconductor
    manufacturing equipment, provided that the capital investment equals or
    exceeds $300 million to reduce chokepoint risks flowing from the
    geographic concentration of critical semiconductor inputs, among other
    objectives.

        a. Would domestic mine projects that produce, smelt, and refine
    minerals and materials for semiconductors be eligible for this funding
    opportunity?
        Answer. Supply chain resilience for raw minerals in the
    semiconductor supply chain is a long-term challenge that will require
    partnership with other agencies as well as industry. CHIPS for America
    is also implementing partnerships for supply chain transparency, risk
    sharing, and resiliency initiatives with the companies, clusters, and
    industry groups across the semi supply chain. Projects such as the ones
    mentioned above may be eligible.
        In February 2023, CHIPS for America launched our first Notice of
    Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for CHIPS funds under the section 9902
    Incentives Program, focused on commercial manufacturing facilities. In
    June 2023, the Department opened our existing funding opportunity and
    application process for large semiconductor supply projects that
    include material and equipment facility projects with capital
    investments equal to or exceeding $300 million.

        Question 3. What actions is the Department of Commerce undertaking
    to ensure the production of domestic minerals and materials essential
    for semiconductor manufacturing? The U.S. currently depends on foreign
    sources for most of our supply of these minerals, including those from
    non-allied nations, including copper, germanium, tellurium, gallium,
    nickel, and cobalt.
        Answer. The Department is in regular communication with Department
    of Energy officials about how best to promote more resilient supply
    chains, especially regarding how the various funding programs can be
    complementary and not duplicative.
        The raw mineral sourcing challenges will have to be addressed in
    concert across agencies as well as with allied countries. U.S. supplies
    of critical minerals and refining capacity should be strengthened to
    meet the demands of the semiconductor, battery, and broader electronics
    industries going forward. Currently CHIPS for America is working with
    other agencies to voice the demand signal for mineral and chemical
    capacity as well as enlisting private enterprises further downstream to
    illustrate and map the entire value chain.
        To advance the strategic priorities of CHIPS for America, in June
    2023, the Department added bigger supply chain projects to the initial
    Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) issued in February of that year.
    This will help position large chipmaking facilities to access the
    materials, supplies, and equipment they need to make the United States
    home to manufacturing clusters.
        Recognizing the national security imperative of investments in the
    domestic semiconductor industry, the Departments of Commerce and
    Defense in July 2023 announced a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) to
    expand collaboration to strengthen the U.S. semiconductor defense
    industrial base. The agreement will increase information-sharing
    between the Departments to facilitate close coordination on the CHIPS
    for America's incentives programs, including collaboration on potential
    investment applications to ensure that our departments are making
    complementary decisions that maximize Federal investments under the
    CHIPS Incentive Program and the Department of Defense's (DoD) Defense
    Production Act and Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment funds. This
    alignment of priorities and decision-making will help ensure that our
    respective investments position the United States to produce
    semiconductor chips essential to national security and defense
    programs.
        To outcompete the People's Republic of China (PRC), we need bold
    domestic investments and innovation ecosystems that bring manufacturing
    in critical technologies and industries back to the United States.
    Without manufacturing strength in the United States and the innovation
    that flows from it, we risk falling behind China in the race to invent
    and commercialize future generations of technology. Diverse, resilient,
    and sustainable supply chains are critical for national security and
    economic competitiveness, and a key element of this effort is
    revitalizing domestic manufacturing, reducing our reliance on the PRC,
    and positioning ourselves to be proactive instead of reactive.
        The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is a major achievement for clean
    energy, energy security, and climate ambition, representing the largest
    investment in climate and clean energy solutions in U.S. history. This
    law makes a historic investment in climate and clean energy solutions,
    delivered through a combination of innovative tax incentives, grant
    programs, and loan guarantees. The clean energy investment and
    production provisions in the IRA will incentivize investments across
    the clean energy supply chain including solar, wind, geothermal,
    hydrogen, critical minerals and battery technologies, tidal and wave
    energy, carbon capture and sequestration, and civil nuclear, among many
    others. In particular, the IRA's section 45X Advanced Manufacturing
    Production credit incentivizes domestic production of battery
    components and critical minerals.
        The Economic Development Administration's Regional Technology and
    Innovation Hubs (Tech Hubs) program is working to create regional
    innovation centers across the country by bringing together industry,
    higher education institutions, state and local governments, economic
    development organizations, and labor and workforce partners to
    supercharge ecosystems of innovation for technologies that are
    essential to our national security and economic competitiveness. The
    Tech Hubs program is a key part of President Biden's Investing in
    America agenda, stimulating private sector investment, creating good-
    paying jobs, revitalizing American manufacturing, and ensuring no
    community is left behind by America's economic progress.
        Through the Tech Hubs program, the Department is committed to
    strengthening economic and national security by advancing the
    capacities of regions to manufacture, commercialize, and deploy these
    technologies, guided by the following priorities: 1) making more U.S.
    regions strong competitors in the global innovation economy; 2)
    building strong communities that share in the prosperity technological
    innovations bring; 3) spurring the creation of new good jobs and other
    opportunities for workers at all skill levels; and 4) strengthening and
    increasing the resilience of the supply chains that our innovative
    technology-centric industries rely on to stay secure and competitive.
        On October 23, 2023, EDA announced the winners of Phase 1 and
    posted the Notice of Funding Opportunity for Phase 2. This announcement
    included 31 designated Tech Hubs, as well as the applications that will
    receive strategy development grants. The 31 Tech Hubs focus on
    developing and growing innovative industries in regions across the
    country, including semiconductors, clean energy, critical minerals,
    biotechnology, precision medicine, artificial intelligence, quantum
    computing, and more.
        Analyzing critical supply chains to identify potential
    vulnerabilities before they become crises--going from reactive to
    proactive--should be prioritized. After receiving an initial $10.8
    million appropriation in FY 2023, the Commerce Department's Industry
    and Analysis (I&A) unit in the International Trade Administration
    launched the U.S. Government's first Supply Chain Center to serve as
    the analytic engine for supply chain resilience policy action within
    the U.S. Government. The FY 2024 Budget Request seeks $21 million to
    scale these efforts within I&A and further institutionalize this
    important work within Commerce. The Supply Chain Center builds on I&A's
    mission to enhance the competitiveness of U.S. companies and protect
    U.S. national security by being: (1) proactive in getting ahead of
    supply chain challenges with analytic frameworks, deep dives, policy
    playbooks, and persistent scanning for vulnerabilities; (2) strategic
    in setting priorities for policy focus and action based on data-driven
    risk analysis; (3) a force multiplier in improving the targeting and
    effectiveness of U.S. Government investments; and (4) a partner to
    industry in building resilient supply chains and ensuring U.S.
    businesses lead the industries of the future.
        ITA is also seeking to expand SelectUSA services to coordinate
    supply chain priorities with state Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)
    attraction efforts and recruit high-value investment targets in
    alignment with supply chain strategies. The FY 2024 Budget seeks $4.75
    million for ITA to expand its investment promotion tool kit to target
    high-value investments in coordination with U.S. states, which would
    dramatically improve SelectUSA's ability to attract investment into the
    United States. In addition, ITA will conduct the analysis required to
    use the specialized expertise and firm-level data needed to develop
    better strategies for attracting specific individual firms to the
    United States. Lastly, the requested funds will bolster the Advocacy
    Center, which works with U.S. businesses to win foreign government
    public tenders, reflecting the importance of global market access to
    maintaining the viability of key domestic suppliers.
        This request is the Global Markets component of an ITA joint
    proposal with the Industry and Analysis business unit. Global Markets
    will leverage the analysis, strategies, and recommendations produced by
    Industry and Analysis under its complementary request to better target
    FDI toward reducing critical, national supply chain risks.
        The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
    Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) helps businesses narrow gaps
    in our supply chains and make manufacturing more resilient. NIST's
    Manufacturing USA program intends to make available competitive awards
    to enable existing Manufacturing USA institutes to transition
    technologies developed at the institutes into domestic production.
        Altogether, these investments in critical technologies and regions
    are essential to maintaining American technological leadership in the
    world and outcompeting the PRC in a 21st century global economy.
                                 Attachment 1:
    NTIA Organizational Chart:

    S&E FY 2023 Q3:

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Funded       Filled       Vacant
                              FTE       Positions    Positions    Positions
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Comparison by
     activity/
     subactivity
    Domestic and                   40           49           42            7
     International
     Policies
    Spectrum Management            29           31           26            5
    Advanced                       31           43           34            9
     Communications
     Research
    Broadband Programs             38           54           48            6
    Public Safety                   7            7            6            1
     Communications
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total                         145          184          156           28
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Innovation Fund FY 2023 Q3:

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Funded       Filled       Vacant
                              FTE       Positions    Positions    Positions
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Comparison by
     activity/
     subactivity
    Public Wireless                 7           10            7            3
     Supply Chain
     Innovation Fund
     Admin
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total                           7           10            7            3
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IIJA FY 2023 Q3:

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Funded       Filled       Vacant
                              FTE       Positions    Positions    Positions
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Comparison by
     activity/
     subactivity
    Broadband Equity,             106          115          101           14
     Access and
     Deployment
    Tribal Broadband               21           22           18            4
     Connectivity
    Digital Equity                 13           13           10            3
    Middle Mile                    15           16           13            3
     Deployment
                                    7
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total                         155          166          142           24
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
                          Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan
    CHIPS Underfunded
        The CHIPS and Science Act authorized nearly $250 billion in
    investments for manufacturing, research, and development which is
    critical for the U.S. to continue to be the world leader in innovation
    and competition. But we've seen in just the last year that these
    authorization levels haven't been matched by appropriations.
        A report from the Federation of American Scientists shows that the
    Fiscal Year 2023 omnibus appropriations bill fell short of CHIPS levels
    by $3 billion, and the Fiscal Year 2024 appropriations are expected to
    fall short by nearly $7.5 billion. The authorization levels in this Act
    are critical to ensuring our future success. That's why I led a letter
    to the Appropriators asking them to fully fund CHIPS and Science
    programs.

        Question 1. What will the consequences be for U.S. leadership in
    science, technology, and innovation if appropriations don't match the
    levels authorized in CHIPS and Science?
        Answer. We currently face intense global competition in the race to
    develop key technology areas such as Artificial Intelligence, Quantum
    Information Science, and Biotechnology which are rooted in sustained
    investment over many decades, and to develop the workforce needed to
    secure the future of innovation. Our success in unlocking the promise
    of these and other technological developments and scientific
    breakthroughs will affect our continued global leadership and our
    economic and national security.
        With the passage of the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, Congress put
    in place a roadmap for meeting this challenge while also spurring
    innovation in communities throughout the country. The President's
    Fiscal Year 2024 Budget Request is an investment in NSF's and the
    entire Federal STEM enterprise's ability to generate more
    breakthroughs, foster more innovations that strengthen our economy and
    national security, and support the individuals who keep the United
    States a global leader in science, engineering, and technology.
    Appropriations below this level will run the risk of ceding U.S.
    leadership in key technologies to our competitors and leaving U.S.-
    based talent behind.
    NSF Regional Innovation Engines
        Question 1. In looking at the Regional Innovation Engine
    applications, what sort of investments in the innovation workforce are
    you seeing states and companies prioritizing?
        Answer. The NSF Engines program is part and parcel in alignment
    with NSF's emphasis on harnessing the geography and demography of
    innovation that exists across the country. There is talent everywhere--
    and it is incumbent upon us to create opportunities for that diverse
    talent, regardless of background or location.
        When we launched the program last year, the response from the
    community exceeded even our own expectations: TIP received nearly 700
    concept outlines for NSF Engines spanning more than 500 organizations
    (including 40 percent that had not previously received funding from
    NSF) from every state and territory.
        The NSF Engines program allows the proposers to prioritize key
    technology focus areas and societal, geostrategic, and national
    challenges of interest to their local economies. NSF Engines finalists
    have proposed everything from breakthrough agricultural technologies
    for food system adaptation to quantum technology development to
    additive manufacturing.
        Each NSF Engine must bring together partners across diverse
    sectors--institutions of higher education, state, local, and tribal
    governments, nonprofits, and vocational/workforce development groups.
    As an example, recent NSF Engines Development Awardee winners include
    up to 80 partners on each award. (To see the myriad partners involved
    with each NSF Engines Development Award or each NSF Engines Finalist,
    visit the map. You can also download these data.)
        Across this portfolio of funded projects and finalists, we are
    seeing extensive focus on workforce development--spanning all levels
    from K-12 to adult and continuing education, and training for all job
    types including technicians, practitioners, researchers, entrepreneurs,
    and educators. Indeed, the NSF Engines program has catalyzed novel
    partnerships between academia, industry, government, and civil society
    in an incredibly powerful way. As an example of the potential exhibited
    by the NSF Engines program, at least one private foundation/
    philanthropy has reached out about partnering with NSF to provide an
    infusion of funding to several NSF Engines Development Awards focused
    on K-12 education innovation.
        Ultimately, to remain globally competitive, the U.S. requires a
    robust workforce, one that is intentionally trained, recognized and
    valued for their contribution to the research enterprise. These will be
    fundamental drivers of national transformation that promotes equity
    among institutions and organizations seeking external funding and
    serves to facilitate diversity of thought, experience, and
    perspectives.

        Question 2. Engaging with community colleges and Minority Serving
    Intuitions are vital to developing a more diverse workforce. Of the 16
    finalists announced for the NSF Engines Type-2 awards, what is the
    makeup of community colleges and MSIs? When does NSF expect to announce
    the final awards?
        Answer. At least 12 of the 16 NSF Engines finalists include at
    least one community college and/or MSI, and in many cases, an NSF
    Engine finalist comprises multiple diverse institutions as part of its
    composition. NSF anticipates announcing the NSF Engines awards this
    winter.
    Increasing and Accelerating Industry Partnerships
        Under your leadership, NSF has been increasing its jointly funded
    research partnerships with industry, such as the Future of
    Semiconductors (FuSe) program and the Resilient & Intelligent NextG
    Systems (RINGS) program.
        Through the FuSe program, The University of Washington in Seattle
    is partnering with other universities, including Howard University, to
    develop new materials for energy efficient and enhanced-performance
    semiconductor-based systems.

        Question 1. Can you describe how you plan to continue increasing
    these partnerships, such as by scaling and expanding successful
    industry-led programs, as well as bringing in new industry sponsors to
    increase the total potential award funding?
        Answer. NSF cultivates partnerships to accelerate transformative
    research, solve societal problems, fuel economic progress and build a
    future-ready workforce. The Foundation stimulates partnerships
    indirectly through programs that require or encourage grantees to work
    in collaboration with non-academic entities. NSF also engages in direct
    external partnerships with other U.S. Federal agencies, with industry,
    private foundations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and with
    international organizations. FuSe and RINGS are examples of NSF's
    direct partnerships. We recognize that direct partnerships with
    industry can provide resources that accelerate basic research, speed
    the transition of basic research to the market, and support workforce
    development. At the same time, NSF is cognizant of certain risks, such
    as intellectual property considerations and perceptions of competitive
    advantage. NSF has developed guiding principles to understand risks,
    costs, and benefits of potential partnerships, as well as
    implementation factors to consider. Using our strategic and careful
    approach to partnerships, and with the establishment of the Directorate
    for Technology, Innovation, and Partnerships (TIP), we anticipate that
    NSF's direct partnerships with industry will continue to grow.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Baldwin to
                          Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan
        The CHIPS and Science Act calls on the National Science Foundation
    to broaden participation of underrepresented groups in science,
    technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) to enable the
    scientific potential of all Americans. Studies suggest that LGBTQ
    people are underrepresented in the STEM workforce. CHIPS & Science
    created a new Chief Diversity and Inclusion Officer role that can help
    address this problem.
        Earlier this year, Senator Feinstein and I led our colleagues in
    calling on the National Science Foundation to better assess
    representation in STEM by adding voluntary sexual orientation and
    gender identity questions to its national workforce surveys.

        Question 1. Can you please provide an update on these efforts and
    when we should expect a final decision and the inclusion of this data
    in the National Science Foundation's biennial reports to Congress?
        Answer. NSF and the National Center for Science and Engineering
    Statistics (NCSES) are committed to producing data that reflects the
    population engaged in STEM activities in the United States--including
    the LGBTQI+ population, while protecting privacy. This is why NCSES has
    undertaken a robust research effort to identify the best ways to
    collect information on sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI).
    As you know, in order to ensure that resulting data accurately reflect
    the population, it is essential that we continue to assess the
    complexity, sensitivity, and performance of these questions within the
    unique context of NCSES's education and workforce surveys (which differ
    from the settings in which similar questions may be asked on other
    surveys), while maintaining the privacy of respondents.
        We have already added a question on gender identity to the 2023
    National Survey of College Graduates (NSCG); we expect these data to be
    released in approximately late 2024.
        NCSES is also conducting testing of questions related to sexual
    orientation and gender identity as part of the 2023 NSCG, as well as
    the 2023 Survey of Doctorate Recipients, and the 2024 Survey of Earned
    Doctorates. NCSES is also in the process of seeking OMB clearance to
    conduct similar testing on the 2024 National Training, Education, and
    Workforce Survey, which will provide data on the skilled technical
    workforce.
        NCSES is committed to releasing the results of this research in a
    timely and transparent manner and communicating to stakeholders how
    these results inform future data collection decisions. These efforts
    are coordinated by the Office of Management and Budget's Office of the
    Chief Statistician of the United States, to ensure the maximum utility
    of the research questions under examination across the Federal
    statistical system and prevent duplication of effort.
        We are extremely excited about the planned release of gender
    identity data in late 2024 and the current testing occurring on our
    other workforce surveys that will inform future data releases. NSF and
    NCSES are committed to providing Congress with policy-relevant
    information based on the best available data in its biennial reports.
    As part of the process of producing the Diversity and STEM and Science
    and Engineering Indicators reports, we assess the availability of data
    that may shed light on salient policy issues and whether such data are
    appropriate for inclusion given available resources and constraints
    such as scope, length, timeliness, and representativeness. We expect to
    undertake similar assessments of SOGI data--if available--for future
    cycles of these publications.
                                     ______

      Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to
                          Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan
    CMB-S4
        As you know, the cosmic microwave background (CMB) carries
    information about the very early universe. Astronomers use the patterns
    in CMB light to determine the total contents of the universe,
    understand the origins of galaxies and look for signs of the very first
    moments after the Big Bang. The ``Stage-4'' of this ground-based CMB
    experiment, CMB-S4, consists of dedicated telescopes equipped with
    highly sensitive superconducting cameras and DOE and NSF have partnered
    with the University of Chicago, Argonne National Lab and Fermilab to be
    a part of this critical research.
        Using advanced telescopes to be located at the South Pole and in
    the Chilean Atacama plateau, CMB-S4 will provide the leap in technology
    and size needed to answer these important questions, not just
    incrementally move towards it. The technology advancements include
    pushing the frontier of cryogenic superconducting electronics and
    sensing elements, such as those at the core of quantum technology. The
    project provides a real-world opportunity to field advanced renewable
    energy research at the South Pole and provides opportunities for STEM
    engagement with broad outreach for student engagement in primary
    education as well as post-secondary education.
        Over the last decade the CMB-S4 has repeatedly received high
    profile support from the broad Physics and Astronomical communities,
    including a strong recommendation from the 2020 Decadal Survey of
    Astronomy and Astrophysics. This recommendation follows enthusiastic
    endorsements from the Astronomy and Astrophysics Advisory Committee, as
    well as from the 2015 NAS/NRC report on NSF Investments in Antarctic
    and Southern Ocean Research and the 2014 Particle Physics Projects
    Prioritization Panel (P5), which recommended pursuing CMB-S4 under all
    budget scenarios.

        Question 1. Given the importance of CMB-S4 to science, technology
    and our Nation's global leadership, when will the National Science
    Foundation (NSF) advance CMB-S4 as a candidate major facility project
    into the Major Facility Design Stage and what are NSF's plans to
    maintain the U.S. leadership in scientific research at the South Pole?
        Answer. NSF's established processes for advancing a project into
    the Major Facility Design Stage are documented in the Research
    Infrastructure Guide. NSF is currently considering the cost, schedule,
    and availability of sites for the CMB-S4 project. The timing for
    advancement of CMB-S4 into the Major Facility Design Stage is not yet
    determined. If constructed, CMB-S4 is envisioned as a partnership
    between NSF and the Department of Energy; the two agencies meet
    frequently through a Joint Oversight Group to coordinate planning
    activities.
        NSF is currently developing a South Pole Station Master Plan to
    enable the long-term support of forefront science such as CMB-S4 at the
    South Pole.
    Critical Materials
        Question 1. Please identify the most troubling risks NSF has
    identified in the critical mineral supply chain.
        Answer. Critical minerals are typically sourced directly from
    primary resources (extracted from the Earth's crust) through well-
    established conventional mining operations. The timelines to
    reestablish domestic supply chains, especially mining operations, are
    long; establishing new mines can take decades due, in part, to
    environmental issues, regulatory requirements, and local community
    concerns. While significant reserves of critical minerals exist on the
    seafloor at sites around the globe, seafloor extraction processes may
    cause major impacts on biological ecosystems, both locally at the
    extraction site and farther afield. Such impacts remain poorly
    characterized. Current minerals and materials sourcing also can involve
    significant geopolitical risks given the weak governmental and
    regulatory structures in many countries.
        The challenge extends beyond extraction to processing, and in this
    respect there is a need for new, scientifically-driven approaches to
    the sustainable processing and recycling of critical minerals. There
    are also workforce needs. We lack a sufficient roster of scientifically
    and technically trained personnel at all levels in the critical
    minerals ecosystem: across exploration, extraction, processing, and
    manufacturing. Also, university scientists and engineers working in
    this sector have limited options to obtain funding for fundamental and
    translational research; Federal support for innovation in the critical
    minerals ecosystem is not matched with national needs.

        Question 2. Please describe what steps the United States must take
    to better partner with allied countries to secure critical minerals,
    while lessening our Nation's dependence on sourcing critical minerals
    mined by firms our countries with strong ties to competitor and
    adversarial regimes, such as the PRC and the Russian Federation, since
    such sourcing often results in adverse humanitarian and national
    security costs.
        Answer. To reduce dependence on adversarial foreign critical
    mineral supplies, the United States must survey and characterize
    domestic resources/reserves for the most domestically essential
    minerals/metals; developmental timelines that are mapped to national
    needs must be established for the exploitation of these reserves. The
    United States must stimulate fundamental research in alternate
    materials, material reuse and recycling, and improved extraction
    processes, leveraging international expertise as appropriate. The
    United States must leverage existing capabilities and build
    partnerships with friendly nations having significant resources and
    capabilities complementary to and/or more advanced than that which we
    have domestically. The United States must develop a robust, competent
    workforce across the critical minerals ecosystem, for example by
    building out research and student exchange partnerships with allied
    nations. The future security of international critical minerals supply
    chains must be reinforced by preventing them from becoming compromised
    by severe adverse environmental and human health impacts.
    Quantum Technology
        Question 1. How does quantum technology factor into the future of
    microelectronics beyond silicon CMOS, as envisioned in the CHIPS +
    Science Act, and in what ways will CHIPS support these and other next
    generation microelectronics and semiconductor technologies?
        Answer. NSF has several programs that are deeply involved in
    researching ways for new quantum discoveries and materials to impact
    the future of micro-electronics beyond silicon including developing
    whole new classes of semiconductors and their uses. This is exemplified
    by the NSF initiative of Future of Semiconductors (FuSe) and two
    Material Innovation Platforms: the Platform for the Accelerated
    Realization, Analysis, and Discovery of Interface Materials (PARADIM)
    and the 2D Crystal Consortium (2DCC).
        For decades, NSF investments have been informed by a combination of
    top-down priorities (from Administrations and Congress), bottom-up
    inputs (from the research community that NSF serves, including through
    NSF-funded conferences/workshops), and data-driven analytics that serve
    to identify emerging areas as well as gaps in NSF's proposal and award
    portfolios. As outlined in the FY 2024 President's Budget Request for
    NSF, building upon more than three decades of exploratory discovery,
    NSF investment in quantum information science (QIS) will help propel
    the Nation forward as a leading developer of quantum technology. This
    investment is a key component of the National Quantum Initiative and
    addresses Administration and Congressional interest in advancing key
    technology focus areas.
        Importantly, NSF's QIS investments build upon the agency's
    longstanding and continuing foundational investments in QIS as well as
    more recent, interdisciplinary investments in centers and small teams
    and targeted workforce development efforts. Moreover, increasingly, a
    systematic approach to maturing foundational quantum discoveries into
    use-inspired technological innovation is critical to transform the
    field of QIS and rapidly accelerate broader impacts to society.
        Pursuant to the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022, NSF established the
    Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships (TIP) to
    specifically accelerate the development of key technology focus areas,
    including semiconductors/microelectronics and QIS, as well as their
    impact on the Nation's long-term economic competitiveness. In alignment
    with this vision, TIP is closely collaborating with other NSF
    directorates to accelerate technology development and translation
    across the full complement of 10 key technology focus areas identified
    in Sec. 10387 of the legislation. A key focus is on maturing technology
    by integrating end-users and potential customers from a full complement
    of science and engineering fields and economic sectors into cycles of
    research, development, and demonstration, resulting in co-design and
    co-creation of novel solutions that can be accelerated to the market
    and society.
        As an example, in response to the National Quantum Initiative and
    in coordination with the National Quantum Coordination Office (NQCO),
    TIP is collaborating with the NSF Directorate for Mathematical and
    Physical Sciences (MPS), which leads the agency's QIS investments, as
    well as with the Directorates for Biological Sciences, Computer and
    Information Science and Engineering (CISE), STEM Education (EDU), and
    Engineering (ENG) on the development of a new initiative called the
    National Quantum Virtual Laboratory (NQVL). The NQVL will support a
    highly accessible shared research infrastructure framework that draws
    on the full spectrum of expertise throughout the Nation to rapidly
    translate QISE ideas formulated in the laboratory through prototyping,
    validation, at-scale testing, and eventual full-scale deployment.
    Beyond fostering use-inspired and translational QIS research, the NQVL
    will democratize access to the varied resources and environments
    necessary to conduct such cutting-edge research, lower barriers to
    entry throughout the QIS research enterprise and promote broadened
    participation of talent anywhere and everywhere.
        Additionally, TIP is collaborating with CISE, EDU, ENG, and MPS on
    a new Future of Semiconductors (FuSe) program, which invested $45.6
    million--including funding from the CHIPS and Science Act--in 24
    research and education projects to enable rapid progress in new
    semiconductor technologies and manufacturing as well as workforce
    development. The FuSe program, a public-private partnership between NSF
    and Ericsson, IBM, Intel, and Samsung, takes a unique and intentional
    holistic, ``co-design'' approach that advances materials, devices, and
    systems integration, while simultaneously considering the performance,
    manufacturability, recyclability and environmental sustainability of
    these materials, devices, and systems. The FuSe program is also
    accelerating the development of the U.S.-based workforce and knowledge
    that enable innovative semiconductor and microelectronics.
        We believe there is strong synergy between our work in
    semiconductors and QIS.
    Emerging Research Institutions
        The CHIPS and Science Act takes important steps to support research
    at emerging research institutions (ERIs)--higher-education institutions
    with less than $50 million in annual Federal research expenditures--
    through a number of provisions, including section 10325, which created
    a five-year ERI partnership pilot program.

        Question 1. Please provide an update on the implementation of
    Section 10325 and the concrete timeline for establishing the ERI
    partnership pilot program.
        Answer. Appropriated funding levels well below the President's
    Request left NSF unable to undertake all of the activities outlined in
    the Act, including Sec. 10325(c).
        While we cannot yet carry out a formal program at this time, NSF
    encourages partnerships and funded awards to include ERIs throughout
    the country. For example, all recently awarded NSF Artificial
    Intelligence Research Institutes include at least one ERI as a funded
    partner. In FY 2023, the Major Research Infrastructure program made
    instrumentation awards to over 40 primarily undergraduate institutions
    (PUIs), which are typically ERIs. Additionally, in FY 2023, the
    Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR)
    statewide awards in its Track 1 Research Infrastructure Improvement
    Program included collaborations with a total of 74 PUIs.
        Large collaborative center awards also often demonstrate
    partnerships between ERIs and more research-active institutions. For
    example, three-quarters of the FY 2023 Science and Technology Center
    awards included partners who are ERIs. The Gen-4 Engineering Research
    Centers call specifies that the lead or at least one of the core
    partner universities must be a university that serves populations of
    traditionally underrepresented students, which is expected to result in
    many new ERCs in FY 2024 including partners who are ERIs.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Kyrsten Sinema to
                          Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan
    Giant Magellan Telescope
        The Giant Magellan Telescope (GMT) now being built in Chile is a
    leading example of what can be accomplished by a consortium of U.S.
    academic institutions and international partners. I am proud that both
    the University of Arizona and Arizona State University are involved in
    this historic effort. This is another example of the unique work that
    the University of Arizona has done in astronomy and the unmatched
    quality of the mirrors it produces in Tucson. There is tremendous
    support in the Senate to advance GMT to obtain the generational
    scientific benefits it promises.
        But GMT cannot succeed without continued significant investment.
    Such investment will accelerate development activities of the top
    priority of the National Academies' Decadal Survey; namely the US-
    Extremely Large Telescope Program (US-ELTP) consisting of the GMT, the
    Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) and the NSF's National Optical-Infrared
    Astronomy Research Laboratory (NOIRLab). I appreciate the NSF's $6.5
    million award for GMT earlier this month under the US-ELTP program.
    With the GMT, the NSF will continue leverage the significant
    philanthropic, state, and non-US investments already made by existing
    GMT partners.
        GMT and TMT would together provide American astronomers with
    newfound access to observe 100 percent of the sky in the Southern and
    Northern hemispheres, respectively. However, as you know these two
    telescopes have significant differences in their sites, technical
    challenges, and timelines. In fact, GMT is already deeply into its
    development phases: GMT has cast and polished mirrors for several
    years, with its seventh and final primary mirror fabrication underway.
    Ultimately, GMT has not faced the same site issues as TMT.

        Question 1. Has the NSF considered decoupling funding or other
    forms of continued investment, prioritization, or considerations for
    GMT from the TMT given GMT does not face some of the same challenges
    that TMT does?
        Answer. NSF is currently managing the U.S. Extremely Large
    Telescope Program (US-ELTP) as a three-element system to deliver
    optimal access to 30m-class telescopes for the U.S. astronomical
    community, including the two ELTs: the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) in
    the northern hemisphere, and the 25-meter Giant Magellan Telescope
    (GMT) in the southern hemisphere. The third element of US-ELTP is the
    critical community science interface and support, which includes data
    management and software tools and services to be provided by NSF's
    National Optical-Infrared Astronomy Research Laboratory (NSF's
    NOIRLab). Each of these elements is being considered separately in the
    Major Facility Design Stage process, with separate reviews of technical
    and programmatic readiness.

        Question 2. If so, could you please provide clarification on what
    NSF is considering as far as separating the potential progress and
    continued support for GMT from TMT as it works to realize the goals of
    the US-ELTP?
        Answer. Although presented under the umbrella of the US-ELTP, NSF
    recognized early on that each element faced significantly different
    challenges and may need separate risk mitigation strategies and
    advancement milestones. As such, NSF admitted GMT and TMT into the
    Major Facility Design Stage as separate projects and held separate
    Preliminary Design Reviews for them to provide independent external
    reviews of their technical readiness. NSF also held separate internal
    Facilities Readiness Panel reviews to evaluate the readiness of each
    project to advance to the Final Design Phase. Going forward, the two
    telescope projects will continue to be evaluated separately, while NSF
    continues to optimize the overall US-ELT program to provide the U.S.
    astronomical community the access to 30m-class telescopes that will
    allow them to continue to lead the world in the exploration and
    understanding of our universe.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jacky Rosen to
                          Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan
    Initiatives in STEM Funding
        I'm proud to have secured a bipartisan provision based on my Rural
    STEM Education Act in the CHIPS and Science Act. This historic
    bipartisan law would break down barriers to rural STEM education
    through grants from the National Science Foundation. Nevada is home to
    nearly 7,500 students who attend rural schools and this law gives them
    opportunities in STEM education and careers. Yet, there is still more
    work to be done to address the challenges standing in the way of
    students of all ages, genders, and backgrounds from pursuing STEM
    education and careers.

        Question 1. What are the benefits of rural STEM education and how
    NSF is working to break down barriers for students in rural and
    underserved communities?
        Answer. NSF is fully committed to the development of a future-
    focused science and engineering workforce that draws on the talents of
    all Americans, in every region of the country. Maintaining our position
    at the vanguard of discovery and innovation requires that we enable
    innovation anywhere and opportunities everywhere--this of course
    includes the STEM talent that we know exists in rural communities.
        Individuals living in rural areas face roadblocks to high-quality
    STEM education and accessible pathways into the STEM workforce.
    Overcoming these disparities in STEM achievement is possible by
    addressing a variety of long-standing issues. For example, creating and
    supporting networks of mentors, increasing opportunities for
    experiential learning, improving preparation for K-12 teaching and
    provision of more teacher resources, and making college more
    affordable.
        Everyone deserves a high-quality STEM education, but access to such
    an education is not equally distributed across the country. NSF
    investments aim to disrupt this condition by reaching countless
    underserved students and under-resourced teachers in rural areas around
    the country.
        Expert knowledge and diverse perspectives are key to maintaining
    our Nation's preeminence in science and engineering. And by investing
    in learners from all geographic areas, EDU is working to grow a vibrant
    and diverse U.S. STEM workforce, through funding opportunities such as
    the Advanced Technological Education (ATE) program. Creating
    opportunities everywhere -including in rural areas--advances the
    frontier of innovative STEM research and development. This effort helps
    broaden pathways for domestic learners to join the future STEM
    workforce. And reaching rural communities presents a great opportunity
    to demonstrate the value of Federal investments in science and
    engineering.
        A recent look at our portfolio revealed that EDU has nearly 500
    active awards that are investigating aspects of rural STEM education.
    Clearly, this is an important area in which NSF/EDU is investing.
        NSF sponsored a recent convening on ``K-12 Rural STEM Education and
    Workforce Development'' at the National Academies (in fulfillment of
    the ``CHIPS and Science Act''). This was an open session/conversation
    to learn more about the development of the legislation from
    congressional staffers and hear about high-level overview of the issues
    in rural STEM education and rural broadband and connectivity issues.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ben Ray Lujan to
                          Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan
        By expanding authorities for not just the National Science
    Foundation, but also the Departments of Energy and Commerce, the CHIPS
    and Science Act makes clear that no single department or agency can do
    it alone. The scientific challenges we face are too big, the timeline
    to meet these challenges is too short, and the international
    competition is too strong. I was pleased to see that NSF and Department
    of Energy signed an MOU to partner on finding solutions to the
    scientific challenges of the 21st century.

        Question 1. Can you share with the committee some concrete examples
    of how NSF will leverage the vast and deep capabilities of the DOE
    national lab system to meet the challenges of the 21st century?
        Answer. In January of this year, NSF and DOE's Office of Science
    signed a memorandum of understanding that will enable increased
    partnerships to address some of our most important challenges. This MOU
    builds upon previous partnerships and provides opportunities for
    collaboration on biotechnology, quantum information science and
    engineering, advanced manufacturing,, artificial intelligence and
    machine learning.
        NSF and DOE's robust partnership includes access to various NSF-and
    DOE-managed multi-user facilities around the globe. One recent success
    from that partnership is the NSF-supported work of researchers at the
    University of South Carolina who collaborated with the DOE's Sandia
    National Laboratories. The researchers have created a new type of
    porous material with unique nanoscale properties that can potentially
    enable superior hydrogen storage solutions--an innovation that would be
    useful for fuel cells used in vehicles, backup power supplies and other
    applications.
        The NSF and DOE work together on many important projects, including
    the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory (NHMFL). The NHMFL is the
    largest and most powerful magnet facility in the world, and it is used
    by scientists from all over the globe to conduct research in a wide
    range of fields. The NSF supported NHMFL is located at three different
    sites: Florida State University, the University of Florida, and the DOE
    Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). Each site has its own unique
    capabilities, and together they work to advance our understanding of
    high magnetic fields and their applications, which may lead to the
    technologies and scientific solutions of tomorrow.
        An additional success from this partnership is an NSF-DOE-supported
    award for Accelerating Innovations in Biomanufacturing Approaches
    through Collaboration Between NSF and the DOE BETO funded Agile
    BioFoundry, a consortium of national laboratories dedicated to
    accelerating biomanufacturing and decarbonizing the economy.
        University of Georgia researchers and DOE's Agile BioFoundry will
    work to increase understanding of the metabolic pathways that allow a
    novel microorganism to produce hexanoic acid, that can be engineered to
    create sustainable aviation fuel among a host of other carbon neutral
    products.
        Another example of the NSF-DOE partnership is the newly awarded
    Synchrotron for Earth and Environmental Science (SEES) facility to the
    University of Chicago. SEES provides researchers access to a suite of
    analytical instrument capabilities at synchrotron beam sources across
    the country, including Argonne National Laboratory, Lawrence Berkeley
    National Laboratory, Brookhaven National Laboratory and SLAC National
    Accelerator Laboratory. The facility enables a range of research from
    critical mineral formation to natural hazards mediation to future
    technological advancements and human health.
                                     ______

      Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Raphael Warnock to
                          Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan
    Regional Technology Hubs and Geographic Diversity
        The CHIPS and Science Act (P.L. 117-167) authorizes regional
    technology hub programs within various agencies, including at the
    Economic Development Administration (EDA) and National Science
    Foundation (NSF). This legislation also requires geographic diversity
    within each program.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ See, e.g., https://www.eda.gov/funding/programs/regional-
    technology-and-innovation-hubs/faq; https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2022/
    nsf22082/nsf22082.jsp.

        Question 1. How does geographic diversity in these programs
    contribute to our national security and our ability to compete on the
    global stage?
        Answer. The NSF Engines program aims to catalyze regional-scale
    innovation ecosystems across the country, particularly in parts of the
    Nation that have not benefited from the technology booms of the last
    few decades. NSF Engines represent regional coalitions that cross
    county and state borders and focus on advancing technologies to address
    pressing national and societal challenges and create economic
    opportunities across the U.S.
        Investment in NSF Engines is predicated on the fact that the U.S.
    has ceded leadership in too many areas such as semiconductors,
    manufacturing, and the bioeconomy--technologies that were built on
    American ingenuity and Federal funding. When we cede such leadership,
    we see the aftereffects--consider the semiconductor shortage and supply
    chain crisis last year, the effects of which we are still feeling
    today. We cannot let that be our future in AI, quantum, wireless, and
    more; we cannot wake up one morning with this realization. If we don't
    address these areas immediately, our economic and national security
    will pay the price.
        If the United States wants to continue to lead in research and
    innovation, we need to invest in both fundamental research and
    translation. We need to create the technologies and jobs of the future
    through such investments. We also need to ensure that we have a
    workforce--a broad and diverse workforce--who are prepared for the jobs
    of today and tomorrow.
        It has been said that America's diversity is our unique competitive
    advantage. We need more people and more ideas from every part of the
    U.S. By ensuring that more people and states have access to Federal
    funding as the NSF Engines program strives to do, American innovation
    can keep the U.S. competitive across all technology areas.

        Question 2. How will you coordinate across agencies to ensure
    geographic diversity across all programs created under the CHIPS and
    Science Act?
        Answer. In July 2023, NSF announced a Memorandum of Understanding
    (MOU) with the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA) to
    officially enable cross-agency coordination on regional innovation
    programs (https://new.nsf.gov/news/nsf-eda-announce-official-
    coordination-regional). Indeed, NSF and EDA share a mutual commitment
    to regional innovation and economic development in communities across
    the Nation. The CHIPS and Science Act authorizes both agencies to
    implement programs to enable regional technology development and
    economic and job growth through the NSF Engines and the EDA Regional
    Technology and Innovation Hubs (Tech Hubs) programs, but at different
    stages of technological development. The NSF Engines program will
    catalyze and foster innovation ecosystems across the U.S. by advancing
    use-inspired research in key technology focus areas, while also
    addressing regional, national, societal, economic, and geostrategic
    challenges. Under the Tech Hubs program EDA is authorized to designate
    and invest in the planning and implementation of geographically
    distributed regional technology hubs that will focus on technology
    advancement and commercialization, job creation, and strengthening U.S.
    competitiveness. Geographic diversity is a fundamental tenet of both
    programs, which seek to identify and invest in areas of the country,
    including small and rural communities, that have the potential to
    become global leaders but have been overlooked as technology
    investments have been concentrated in a handful of established regions.
        Collectively, these programs--along with many of the agencies'
    other investments, like EDA's Build Back Better Regional Challenge
    awards--will accelerate technology advancement and commercialization,
    innovation and entrepreneurship, job creation and workforce training,
    and more. Ultimately, NSF Engines and EDA Tech Hubs speed and scale
    research and development outputs and enable economic opportunities
    nationwide; in turn, they contribute to regional economic growth and
    U.S. competitiveness in key technology areas. Visit the map of various
    NSF and EDA initiatives.
        Beyond the NSF Engines and EDA Tech Hubs programs, the CHIPS and
    Science Act authorized many other initiatives across the U.S.
    Government with a focus on harnessing the geography and demography of
    innovation. In addition, several preexisting programs also have this
    focus. For example, the CHIPS-mandated Subcommittee on Microelectronics
    Leadership (SML), with representation across microelectronics-active
    agencies including NSF and the Department of Commerce, convenes
    frequently to ensure open interagency communication and coordination on
    this focus across a range of investments.

        Question 3. Among the 16 finalists for the NSF Regional Engines
    award, how many can expect to be funded by the program?
        Answer. NSF received $200 million in FY 2023 Appropriations for the
    NSF Engines program, of which we invested $43 million on 44 NSF Engine
    Development Awards and $20 million on nearly 50 capacity-building
    awards at HBCUs, MSIs, and other emerging research institutions. The
    remaining funding will go toward supporting the first two years of NSF
    Engines awards. The actual number of awards will be dependent upon the
    quality of the proposals received.

        Question 4. Does NSF expect to conduct a second solicitation round
    for NSF Type 2 Engines?
        Answer. The President's FY 2024 Request includes funding for a
    second round for the NSF Engines program. A final decision will be
    subject to appropriations. NSF intends to be ready to issue a new NSF
    Engines funding opportunity in Spring 2024.

        Question 5. Is cybersecurity a focus area for the NSF Regional
    Engines program?
        Answer. The NSF Engines program supports projects across all key
    technology and challenge areas as outlined in the CHIPS and Science Act
    of 2022, including cybersecurity. Of the NSF Engines Development
    Awardees, 19 are working on cybersecurity challenges with a total
    investment of $18.8 million across 27 states and territories.

        Question 6. Will you commit to coming to Georgia to see the
    developments in technology, manufacturing, and research happening in
    our state?
        Answer. The Director would be delighted to visit!
    HBCU Research Capacity Building
        Institutions of higher education conduct crucial research that
    helps drive American innovation and build a talented workforce pipeline
    that strengthens American competitiveness; however, Minority-Serving
    Institutions and Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
    may lack the capacity or institutional knowledge to access Federal
    research funding opportunities.\2\ In light of this concern, the CHIPS
    and Science Act directs NSF to provide grants to build institutional
    research capacity at HBCUs.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ See https://tcf.org/content/commentary/testimony-the-value-of-
    hbcus-should-be-recognized-through-greater-public-investment.
        \3\ See, e.g., Pub. L. No. 117-167, tit. 5 Sec. 10524.

        Question 1. Why is it important to build research capacity at
    HBCUs?
        Answer. HBCUs play an important role in our research and education
    ecosystem, conferring approximately 18 percent of all STEM-related
    Bachelor's degrees that go to Black/African American students in the
    U.S. and approximately 1/3 of STEM doctoral degrees. At NSF, we believe
    that talent and opportunities are everywhere, and it is in our
    collective interest to ensure that everyone can participate in driving
    innovation. Georgia is home to many of our Nation's HBCUs and NSF is
    committed to research capacity building efforts at these institutions
    so that they can contribute to fundamental discovery and basic research
    in the United States. Despite significant contributions that HBCUs make
    in education, training, and STEM workforce development, these
    institutions are systemically and historically underfunded and under-
    resourced, which limit their research competitiveness.

        Question 2. What is NSF doing to build institutional research
    capacity at HBCUs?
        Answer. Initiatives such as our new GRANTED program are aimed
    directly at building research capacity at institutions such as MSIs and
    Emerging Research Institutions. In fact, NSF recently announced a
    GRANTED award to Emory University to support the expansion of the
    National Organization of Research Development Professionals (NORDP)
    Consultants Program. This $9.2M NSF awards aims to increase the
    capacity at 16 MSIs and HBCUs to develop research projects, secure
    funding and engage students in research.
        The NSF Historically Black Colleges and Universities--Excellence in
    Research (HBCU-EiR) program strengthens research capacity at HBCUs by
    providing opportunities for both public and private HBCUs, particularly
    for those who have not been successful in larger NSF Research & Related
    Activities competitions. HBCU-EiR aims to stimulate sustainable
    improvement in HBCUs' research and development capacity. Clark Atlanta
    University, Morehouse College, Morehouse School of Medicine, Savannah
    State University, and Spelman College have all been recipients of HBCU-
    EiR awards. In FY 2023, the HBCU-EiR program also supported planning
    grant awards to HBCUs for initial conceptualization, planning, and
    collaboration activities in formulating plans for a future submission
    to the HBCU-EiR program. Additionally, in September 2023, the HBCU-EiR
    program released a new funding opportunity (Advancing Research Capacity
    at HBCUs through Exploration and Innovation, ARC-HBCU) to support
    collaboration among HBCU faculty, research administrators, and academic
    leadership to explore innovative approaches for addressing the HBCUs'
    research capacity needs. Project outcomes have potential to lead to new
    models and practices that will sustainably increase research capacity
    at HBCUs. The first ARC-HBCU awards will be made in FY24.
        The Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation Program
    (LSAMP) emphasizes the development of broad-based regional and national
    alliances of academic institutions, school districts, state and local
    governments, and the private sector. All work together to increase the
    number of STEM degrees awarded to underserved and underresourced
    students in STEM disciplines. And to broaden pathways to advance STEM
    degrees, LSAMP launched the Bridge-to-the Doctorate (BD) program, which
    provides financial support and the necessary academic and research
    skills that enable students to thrive in STEM graduate degrees. So far,
    more than 2500 students are recipients of BD fellowships.
        For 25 years, NSF's Historically Black Colleges and Universities--
    Undergraduate Program (HBCU-UP) enhances the quality of undergraduate
    STEM education and the research capacities of HBCUs and other minority-
    serving institutions across the country. Through this program, NSF has
    invested in countless research projects that are driving the fields of
    machine learning, cognitive psychology, renewable energy, and much
    more.
        At Spelman College, researchers seek to understand how assessment
    practices in post-secondary mathematics courses can impact Black female
    students' academic achievement on tests, retention in other courses,
    and mathematical identity and agency. Results from this project will
    add important insights to the body of knowledge about grading in higher
    education.
        HBCU-UP funding is aiding Albany State College in Georgia to
    strengthen faculty research capability and improve research and
    teaching at the institution.
        And at Savannah State University, researchers are developing
    machine learning models that will be used as an aggregate quality
    classification tool by highway agencies. The project will also develop
    an undergraduate research program that will prepare undergraduate
    students for careers in transportation geotechnics.
        The Centers of Research Excellence in Science and Technology
    (CREST) program provides support to enhance the research capabilities
    of minority-serving institutions by establishing centers that
    effectively integrate education and research. CREST promotes the
    development of new knowledge, enhancements of the research productivity
    of individual faculty, and an expanded presence of students who are
    members of groups underrepresented in STEM disciplines.
        Most recently, a new project to launch a CREST center at Morgan
    State University (an HBCU in Maryland) will focus on advanced magnets,
    semiconductors and developing the workforce in these areas. These
    fields are of great importance to modern technologies and the Nation's
    economy. The project is partially funded by the ``CHIPS and Science
    Act,'' and it fits well with the current Administration's priorities.
        CREST plays a role nationwide in expanding the presence of students
    historically underrepresented in STEM disciplines:

        North Carolina A&T became the first HBCU to receive an NSF ERC
    award. This started out as a CREST Center, which then evolved into an
    Engineering Research Center that supports convergent research,
    education, and technology translation at universities that will lead to
    strong societal impacts.
        Prairie View A&M University is addressing important questions about
    reducing carbon dioxide emissions, increasing the sustainability of
    fossil fuel energy sources, and improving the technological efficiency
    of bioenergy and offshore wind energy. The Environmental Sustainability
    subproject focus is on process engineering and stochastic methods to
    enhance the sustainability of fossil fuel energy sources, and life
    cycle assessment. (PRAIRIE VIEW A&M UNIVERSITY--NSF CREST Center for
    Energy & Environmental Sustainability--Phase II).
        And at UDC, the CREST Center for Nanotechnology Research and
    Education is advancing engineering curriculum. It is integrating
    multidisciplinary nanotechnology education and hands-on laboratory
    experience in graduate, undergraduate, and high school courses. It is
    working to attract, train, and retain students, focusing on
    underrepresented groups, for STEM workforce.

        Question 3. How is NSF measuring the success of these efforts to
    build institutional research capacity?
        Answer. At this time NSF relies primarily on annual reports from
    individual projects to glean information about i) undergraduate and
    graduate students whose research is supported by the project and ii)
    the matriculation status of those students. Professional development
    opportunities taken by members of the PI team and their students are
    also reported. Each new annual cohort of awardees generally represents
    an increase in the number of new PIs. For example, both Clark Atlanta
    University and Spelman College have each received four HBCU-EIR awards
    since FY 2018. Each annual report generally also reports the engagement
    of new undergraduate students from year to year. Each project also
    engages a different cohort of students as the research area of each
    project is different and led by a different PI.

        Question 4. What are the best practices for non-HBCUs to strengthen
    research partnerships with HBCUs, or vice versa?
        Answer. Non-HBCU and HBCU collaborations can serve as critical
    partnerships that further enhance the research competitiveness of HBCUs
    through leveraging and complementing one another's strengths,
    benefiting both non-HBCUs and HBCUs. Specifically, while HBCUs can
    offer non-HBCUs best practices on recruiting and retaining students of
    color for STEM undergraduate and graduate studies and the STEM
    workforce, non-HBCUs may offer opportunities for HBCU faculty to
    develop sustainable expertise and long-term plans for their research
    program and career trajectories through shared infrastructure, human
    resources, and teaching support. An additional critical best practice
    is maximizing opportunities for the intersection of all entities that
    make up the research ecosystem, including federal, nonfederal, state,
    local, and industry engagement.
    Workforce and Community Colleges
        A skilled domestic workforce is critical to the success of
    investments in the CHIPS and Science Act (P.L. 117-167), including
    those in semiconductor development, information technologies,
    manufacturing, and biotechnology. Community and technical colleges are
    well positioned to respond to the relevant emerging technologies
    workforce needs by providing shorter-term, experiential or work-based
    learning for a broad population of students, including rural Americans
    and those from underrepresented backgrounds.

        Question 1. What roles do community and technical colleges play in
    addressing workplace shortages?
        Answer. Community colleges play a critical role in addressing STEM
    workplace shortages. They offer educational opportunities for
    individuals who are historically underrepresented in STEM, and they can
    act as a pathway into four-year institutions of higher education and
    into workforce opportunities in emerging technologies of national
    importance, including semiconductor design, advanced manufacturing,
    cybersecurity, and more.
        The Advanced Technological Education (ATE) program is NSF's key
    effort that helps to boost the skilled technical workforce--the sector
    of jobs that requires more than a high school diploma but less than a
    bachelor's degree. ATE provides grants to improve technician education
    at community colleges and in the Career and Technical Education
    programs in high schools. And the program funds projects that improve
    technical education in all the high-tech fields that drive the
    economy--biotech, cybersecurity, advanced manufacturing,
    microelectronics, semiconductor manufacturing, electric vehicle
    manufacturing, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, etc. ATE
    reaches nearly 40,000 students and 9,000 teachers annually.
        The country is currently experiencing a major shortage in workers
    in the microelectronics and semiconductor field. Last year, EDU
    partnered with Intel Corporation to help educate and train the Nation's
    semiconductor manufacturing (and semiconductor manufacturing design)
    workforce and advance opportunities for equitable STEM education. And
    as part of this effort, a Dear Colleague Letter announced award
    opportunities in the ATE program and the Scholarships in Science,
    Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (S-STEM) program, programs
    that build on or leverage strong industry-academic partnerships to
    strengthen the semiconductor manufacturing workforce.
        The ATE program also supports five large ATE Centers with a
    manufacturing focus:

        National Center for Next Generation Manufacturing (NCNGM), based at
    Tunxis Community-Technical College (CT), which coordinates partnerships
    involving community colleges, universities, business, industry, and
    government around the Nation to develop a pipeline of students with the
    skills to pursue careers in advanced manufacturing during the Fourth
    Industrial Revolution, known as ``Industry 4.0.''
        National Center for Welding Education and Training (Weld-Ed), based
    at Lorain County Community College (OH), which has developed curricula
    and provided professional development for faculty to address the demand
    for skilled welding technicians, especially technicians who know
    ``lightweighting'' welding processes, which are critical in advanced
    manufacturing and tertiary industries.
        Center for Aviation and Automotive Technological Education Using
    Virtual E-Schools (CA2VES), based at Clemson University (SC), which has
    developed cutting-edge manufacturing curricula using virtual reality
    and artificial intelligence e-learning platforms.
        Florida Advanced Technological Education (FLATE) Center, hosted by
    FloridaMakes in Orlando, which offers resources for students, faculty,
    and industry to support the more than 20,000 companies and 380,000
    people who work in manufacturing in the state of Florida.
        Minnesota State Advanced Manufacturing Center of Excellence
    (MSAMCOE), based at Bemidji State University (MN), which has promoted
    manufacturing careers to K-12 students, developed ``digital badges''
    that recognize students' participation in manufacturing-related
    experiences, and offered professional development opportunities for
    educators.
        And because U.S. global competitiveness depends on the readiness of
    the Nation's STEM workforce, this year, NSF published a new Dear
    Colleague Letter (DCL) that highlights investments in programs that
    directly support the preparation of this workforce. As part of this
    effort, this Skills Training in Advanced Research & Technology (START)
    DCL announces an updated supplemental funding opportunity for the ATE
    Program and others.
        In addition to ATE, this year the agency announced a new program
    that will accelerate the effect of inclusive and evidence-based
    practices in undergraduate STEM education at two-year colleges across
    the country. The IUSE: Innovation in Two-Year College STEM Education
    program (ITYC) is open to two-year colleges that offer degrees in STEM.
    A great aspect of this program is that four-year institutions and
    professional organizations may partner with two-year college that
    submit proposals.
        Moreover, projects funded through ITYC may be in any discipline
    that is currently supported by NSF funding (and that is a wide range).
    ITYC differs from ATE a bit as it looks more at the student experience
    at community colleges and the institutional strengths of the
    institutions.
        Increasing retention and graduation rates at two-year colleges is
    an ongoing challenge--some of the grand challenges follow students from
    the schools they came from to the community colleges they go to. The
    Community College Research Center has found that public community
    colleges receive less funding than four-year institutions, and the
    community colleges that serve the most disadvantaged students receive
    the fewest dollars per student. Additionally, Federal data on
    completion and graduation rates show that community college students
    have much lower graduation rates than students at four-year
    institutions, and data from the National Student Clearinghouse and the
    Community College Research Center indicate that four out of five
    students who begin at a community college say they plan to go on to get
    a bachelor's degree, but only about one in six actually do. That's down
    by nearly 15 percent since 2020. By adding ITYC to our portfolio, NSF
    will make greater investments in community colleges. This will open
    opportunities to graduate from two-year colleges and contribute to the
    workforce.
        Many of NSF's long-standing programs also often partner with and/or
    support community colleges/students/teachers.
        HBCU-UP, for example, is funding a project at Hinds Community
    College-Utica Community in Mississippi to strengthen the math
    performance of students who aspire to earn STEM degrees. The
    overarching goals are to recruit, prepare, develop, and retain African
    American students who have expressed interest in STEM fields and are at
    risk for failure in math courses. [Targeted Infusion Project:
    STEMulating the M in STEM]
        And in South Carolina, NSF's Scholarships in Science, Technology,
    Engineering, and Mathematics Program (S-STEM) is supporting high-
    achieving, low-income students with demonstrated financial need at
    Spartanburg Community College, Trident Community College, and Clemson
    University. The goal is to get students who begin their academic path
    at community colleges to transfer into engineering and computing degree
    programs at four-year institutions. [Collaborative Research: Student
    Pathways in Engineering and Computing for Transfer Success]
        Moreover, this summer, NSF partnered with the White House and other
    Federal agencies to unveil the National Cyber Workforce and Education
    Strategy, a first-of-its-kind comprehensive approach aimed at
    addressing both immediate and long-term cyber workforce needs. As part
    of this initiative, NSF renewed funding for institutions including
    community colleges, including Sinclair Community College in Ohio, to
    engage underrepresented student in cybersecurity education. These
    institutions represent the diversity of NSF investments across
    geographic and racial demographics, including HBCUs, HSIs, and
    universities in EPSCoR jurisdictions.
        These investments were made through NSF's CyberCorps Scholarships
    for Service program which, for decades, has worked to build a strong
    Federal cybersecurity workforce. In fact, since the first cohort of 31
    students in 2001, the CyberCorps program has supported more than 5,000
    students who play critical roles defending our Nation's cyberspace by
    working at federal, state, tribal, and local government organizations.
        CyberCorps SFS also supports many community colleges through its
    pathways program. Currently, there are 28 community colleges
    participating in the CyberCorps Pathways:

        Like at Towson University in Maryland, where CyberCorps SFS is
    preparing highly qualified cybersecurity professionals with skills such
    as forensics capabilities in the Federal workforce. CyberCorps
    established a pathway between Towson and the Community College of
    Baltimore County to support students through early mentoring and
    advising in cybersecurity education. This collaboration provides an
    opportunity for recruiting students from populations traditionally
    underrepresented in computing. [CyberCorps: Scholarship for Service at
    Towson University]
        And because transferring community college courses to four-year
    institutions can often prove difficult, researchers at Old Dominion
    University in Virginia saw an opportunity through NSF's Secure and
    Trustworthy Cyberspace (SaTC) program to tackle this problem. This was
    done by connecting three community colleges within the area with Old
    Dominion University, creating a formal academic pathway for students to
    a four-year institution. This prepared students to enter the
    cybersecurity workforce, and it also increased the diversity of both
    the cybersecurity student population and potential new employees.
    [SaTC: EDU: Creating Cybersecurity Pathways Between Community Colleges
    and Universities] (The three community colleges included: Tidewater
    Community College, Northern Virginia Community College, and Thomas
    Nelson Community College)

        Question 2. What can Congress do to help Community and Technical
    colleges strengthen their capacity to train workers in the skills
    required to succeed in high-growth, high-demand industries?
        Answer. Congress can provide continued investment in NSF's
    programs, like ATE, ITYC, HBCU-UP, CyberCorps, etc.; support career
    pathway programs from two-year colleges to four-year institutions;
    stand up for programs at technical colleges that provide education in
    emerging technologies, like AI, advanced manufacturing. . .; support
    opportunities for community college teachers (mentorship, professional
    development, continued education, resource availability, etc.); and
    understand that NSF alone cannot solve the grand challenges in STEM. It
    is through collaborations, with industry, other Federal partners, non-
    profits, community organizations, etc. that we will be able to make the
    biggest impact. (Working with the field to help itself.)

        Question 3. How will a project's economic and social impact, such
    as workforce development, impact the award amount each project will
    receive?
        Answer. Proposals are submitted in response to program
    announcements, Dear Colleague Letters, and solicitations, which
    generally provide the total amounts available and the estimated number
    of awards for those available funds.
        Reviewers evaluate all proposals against two criteria: Intellectual
    Merit: the potential to advance knowledge; and Broader Impacts: the
    potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of
    specific, desired societal outcomes.
    Administrative Burden on Universities
        Question 2. What steps is NSF taking to reduce and minimize the
    administrative burden on universities of the implementation of the
    CHIPS and Science Act?
        Answer. NSF has historically considered the imposition of
    administrative burden prior to implementation of new requirements on
    universities, especially our proposer and awardee community. The
    following provides illustrative examples of steps NSF is taking or has
    taken to reduce and minimize the administrative burden associated with
    universities' implementation of applicable CHIPS and Science Act
    research security provisions:

       SEC. 10634. RESEARCH SECURITY TRAINING REQUIREMENT FOR
            FEDERAL RESEARCH AWARD PERSONNEL. NSF has co-funded (along with
            the Department of Energy, the National Institutes of Health,
            and the Department of Defense) the development of research
            security training modules. These resources will be made readily
            available to the U.S. research community, including research
            universities by the end of January 2024. These four modules
            will provide fundamental training to the research community and
            will eliminate the need for individual organizations to develop
            their own training programs. The four training modules address
            why research security is important, guidance on disclosure
            requirements, information on assessing risk, and distinguishing
            research security concerns from legitimate international
            cooperation. These modules also will ensure compliance with
            requirements imposed by the Federal research funding agencies
            necessary to implement NSPM-33. Note that these training
            modules also will assist the recipient community in meeting the
            requirements established in CHIPS and Science Act Section
            10337, Responsible conduct in research training.

       SEC. 10339B. FOREIGN FINANCIAL SUPPORT. Prior to
            implementation of Section 10339B in the ``NSF Proposal &
            Policies & Procedures Guide'', NSF has been working with
            professional societies \4\ to consider ways to help mitigate
            the administrative burden associated with this new reporting
            requirement for foreign financial gifts and contracts received
            beginning on July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024. NSF has
            worked with all stakeholders, including universities, to
            minimize duplication and respond to questions. The
            conversations to date have been very productive and will help
            ensure compliance when the system to collect the relevant
            required data from Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) goes
            into effect in July 2024.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Represented professional societies include: the Council on
    Governmental Relations, the Association of American Universities, the
    American Council on Education, the National Association of Independent
    Colleges and Universities, and the Association of Public & Land-Grant
    Universities.

       SEC. 10632. MALIGN FOREIGN TALENT RECRUITMENT PROGRAM
            PROHIBITION. Section 4(b) of National Security Presidential
            Memorandum-33 (NSPM-33) directs that ``research funding
            agencies shall require the disclosure of information related to
            potential conflicts of interest and commitment from
            participants in the Federally funded R&D enterprise . . . The
            appropriate disclosure requirement varies depending on the
            individual's role in the United States R&D enterprise.''
            Section 4(b)(vi) directs that ``agencies should standardize
            forms for initial disclosures as well as annual updates, . . .
            and should provide clear instructions to accompany these forms
            and to minimize any associated administrative burden.'' NSF led
            the development of the Biographical Sketch and Current and
            Pending (Other) Support Common Disclosure Forms and serves as
            steward of these forms on behalf of OSTP. These common
            disclosure forms are intended to clarify what is expected of
            senior/key persons when applying for R&D funding from Federal
            research funding agencies. As part of the development process,
            the Section 10632 certification requirement was implemented in
            each of the Common Forms and ensures that consistent language
            is used by each Federal research funding agency in
            implementation of this statutory requirement. This will greatly
            assist researchers in understanding the requirements associated
            with this provision in CHIPS and Science. These Common Forms
            were cleared by the Office of Management and Budget on October
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            31, 2023.

       SEC 10338. RESEARCH SECURITY AND INTEGRITY INFORMATION
            SHARING ANALYSIS ORGANIZATION (RSI-ISAO). The RSI-ISAO, renamed
            the Safeguarding the Entire Community in the U.S. Research
            Ecosystem (SECURE) Center, would empower the U.S. research
            community (including Institutes of higher education, non-profit
            research institutions, and small and medium-sized for-profit
            organizations) to address foreign government interference, and
            support security-informed decision-making through a variety of
            information and services.

       SEC. 10331. OFFICE OF RESEARCH SECURITY AND POLICY. NSF is
            working collaboratively with stakeholders to develop a Dear
            Colleague Letter (DCL) that will focus on supporting research
            security-related functions and resources within emerging and
            developing research IHEs. The DCL is exploring specific areas
            to support, including but not limited to developing a hub
            concept that would provide shared services to emerging and
            developing research institutions, which could be replicated
            nationally.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Peter Welch to
                          Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan
        To reverse course on climate change, we need to invest in the clean
    energy technologies of tomorrow. This means the U.S. needs to provide
    meaningful support to our efficiency and clean energy innovators so
    they can build strong domestic supply chains for their products. The
    CHIPS & Science Act established the Directorate of Technology within
    the National Science Foundation to build a U.S. technology development
    to commercialization pipeline.

        Question 1. Can you describe a success the Directorate has had in
    the clean energy space thus far?
        Answer. The NSF Engines program is already a great example of
    success. NSF had over 700 concept outlines submitted from all across
    the country at the start of this process. We were very intentional in
    how we engaged with the community to encourage teaming and partnerships
    among potential proposers. We fully expect that this type of engagement
    and teaming will have a lasting positive impact.
        In May of this year, we awarded 44 NSF Engines Development Awards
    spanning 46 U.S. states and territories. Of those awards, 23 are
    working on energy technologies--a $23 million investment across 30
    states and territories.
        NSF Engines will spur use-inspired research that will lead to new
    technologies or startup companies. We envision this research will drive
    innovators to engage in the NSF's Lab-to-Market Platform, including
    applying to programs like the NSF Small Business Innovation Research/
    Small Business Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) programs.
        As one example of success, the NSF SBIR/STTR programs funded
    Dimensional Energy (NSF-1831166)--a company that uses sunlight to
    convert carbon dioxide into energy. Its high-light reactor turns carbon
    dioxide and water into raw materials that could be used to create fuel.

        Question 2. What can Congress do to further support the Directorate
    of Technology's work?
        Answer. NSF is grateful for the bipartisan support Congress has
    shown for our mission in both the CHIPS and Science Act and the FY 2023
    appropriations. This support comes at a pivotal time for the United
    States in terms of international competitiveness and NSF is proud to be
    a leader in support of our STEM talent and the innovation that will
    keep us at the vanguard of discovery into the future.
        Sustained investments will be necessary for us to fully realize the
    bold vision outlined in the CHIPS and Science Act.
                                     ______

          Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ted Cruz to
                          Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan
    Research Security Guardrails for Fundamental Research
        Since 1985, our collaborations in fundamental research with other
    countries have been completely open, unregulated, and unprotected. For
    this kind of research, we have put no restrictions on data-sharing or
    with whom research is done. Of concern, China has been able to leverage
    the openness of the U.S. research system and acquire technologies and
    know-how critical to U.S. national security and competitiveness. U.S.
    researchers on Federal research grants for R&D in cutting edge
    technologies are concurrently collaborating with China on fundamental
    research projects.

        Question 1. Do you support putting security guardrails around
    fundamental research, including restrictions on data-sharing?
        Answer. NSF is open to a discussion on both guardrails for
    providing NSF-funding to any entity of concern as well as guardrails
    and risk mitigations regarding potential collaboration with entities of
    concern, including data-sharing. In fact, we have several guardrails in
    place already as described below. It is of utmost importance to make
    sure that American innovation is safeguarded.
        NSF is in the process of implementing a new policy (in the 2024
    PAPPG) that will allow NSF to return without review or decline
    proposals that have the potential to negatively impact research
    security and integrity due to credible information of a national
    security concern. This decision-making process will be informed by a
    risk rubric comprised of risk-based indicators, which is currently
    under development.
        NSF also commissioned a JASON study to help inform NSF's thinking
    on specific steps that it might take to identify sensitive areas of
    research, and processes that NSF might use to address security in those
    research areas of concern. NSF expects the final JASON report by the
    end of January 2024.
    National Science Foundation (NSF) Grant for Journalist Therapy
        In September 2022, the NSF began dispersing a $5 million award to
    the George Washington University to create a therapy toolkit for
    journalists targeted by ``misinformation-driven harassment campaigns.''
    \1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ See USA Spending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2230683_4900

        Question 1. Please explain in detail how this award advances the
    NSF's statutory mission ``to promote the progress of science.''
        Answer. This project fulfills Section 4(4) of the IOGAN Act. The
    purpose of the project is to create a system to support journalists and
    experts who inform the public about topics that are subject to
    manipulated media. This research also aligns with the guidance Congress
    gave NSF in the FY 2022 Appropriations, to work across disciplines to
    counter online influence operations by foreign adversaries by helping
    individuals who can help counter these operations when they are
    subsequently attacked for doing so.
    NSF Engagement in Censorship Projects
        During your testimony, you made the following statement: ``I want
    to say one thing very categorically, we do not--NSF does not engage in
    censorship. We do not regulate any content and engage with anybody who
    also does so.'' You then stated: ``We are not in the business of
    censorship. We are not in the business of controlling content.''
    However, a cursory examination of NSF grants directly contradicts your
    claim that NSF does not engage with anybody who regulates content. For
    example, since Fiscal Year 2021, NSF has funded over 100 academic
    projects that are aimed at supposedly reducing ``mis-, dis-, and mal-
    information,'' much of which is simply content that the progressive
    left does not agree with.

      1.  Define ``censorship.''

      2.  Define ``regulate [. . .] content.''

      3.  Define ``controlling content.''

      4.  Define ``engage'' in the context of your statement above.

      5.  Define ``in the business of'' in the context of your statement
            above.

        Answer. As part of the agency's mission and, as requested by
    Congress as described in the response below, the National Science
    Foundation enables the Nation's scientists to study the flow of
    information. That may happen by studying how computer networks affect
    the spread of information, or it may be by studying how users of those
    networks interact with the network or with each other. NSF's interests
    lie in the underlying technological and foundational computer science
    and sociological questions that can inform users, industries,
    regulators, and Congress in this space.
    NSF Grants with First Amendment Implications
        Answer. These awards are made pursuant to sections 3 and 11 of the
    National Science Foundation (NSF) Act of 1950. Under those authorities,
    ``The Foundation is authorized and directed--(1) to initiate and
    support basic scientific research and programs to strengthen scientific
    research potential and science education programs at all levels in the
    mathematical, physical, medical, biological, social, and other
    sciences, and to initiate and support research fundamental to the
    engineering process and programs to strengthen engineering research
    potential and engineering education programs at all levels in the
    various fields of engineering, by making contracts or other
    arrangements (including grants, loans, and other forms of assistance)
    to support such scientific, engineering, and educational activities and
    to appraise the impact of research upon industrial development and upon
    the general welfare;'' and ``(8) to take a leading role in fostering
    and supporting research and education activities to improve the
    security of networked information systems.'' (42 USC 1862(a)). To carry
    out those activities the Foundation is authorized ``to enter into
    contracts or other arrangements, or modifications thereof, for the
    carrying on, by organizations or individuals in the United States. .
    .of such scientific or engineering activities as the Foundation deems
    necessary to carry out the purposes of'' the NSF Act of 1950. (42 USC
    1870(c)).
        The awards described below are representative of the ways that the
    National Science Foundation enables the Nation's scientists to study
    the flow of information. That may happen by studying how computer
    networks affect the spread of information, or it may be by studying how
    users of those networks interact with the network or with each other.
    Given how prevalent the use of social media is in American society it
    is important that NSF enable our Nation's scientists to add to our
    common understanding of how and why those networks work. This includes
    studying how false or misleading information is spread among those
    networks.
        These awards are also consistent with Congressional explanatory
    text accompanying the final appropriations for Fiscal Years 2021 and
    2022 which stated that ``NSF is encouraged to consider additional
    research efforts that will help counter influence from foreign
    adversaries on the Internet and social media platforms designed to
    influence U.S. perspectives, sow discord during times of pandemic and
    other emergencies, and undermine confidence in U.S. elections and
    institutions'' (166 Cong. Rec. H7947 (2020) (Explanatory Statement
    accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021); H. Comm Print
    47-047, Legislative Text and Explanatory Statement, Book 1, at 303
    (2022) (Explanatory Statement accompanying the Consolidated
    Appropriations Act, 2022)).
        NSF does not endorse any outcomes from funded research, and in fact
    explicitly disclaims the final Project Outcome Reports for the General
    Public as written and presented by the researcher(s), using the
    following text from NSF's Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide
    (PAPPG):
        ``This Project Outcomes Report for the General Public is displayed
    verbatim as submitted by the Principal Investigator (PI) for this
    award. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations
    expressed in this Report are those of the PI and do not necessarily
    reflect the views of the National Science Foundation; NSF has not
    approved or endorsed its content.''
        (PAPPG at VII.D.3.) As such, funding these projects does not
    abridge the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech.
        The above referenced statute and explanation pertain to each award
    listed below. In addition, an explanation of the purpose of each award
    is provided.
        For each of the following awards, please provide the section of
    NSF's statutory mandate that the award fulfills and a ``yes'' or ``no''
    answer as to whether NSF believes the awarding of government funds for
    the project is consistent with the First Amendment. For awards to which
    you answered ``yes,'' please provide any documentation or analysis NSF
    conducted to verify that the project would not infringe on lawful
    speech. For awards to which you answered ``no,'' indicate whether you
    will reevaluate and possibly rescind the award.
        For responses:

        1. $5 million ongoing award to the University of Washington.

      a.  ``[S]olutions must not only provide the public with skills for
            determining the truthfulness of claims, but must also provide
            resources for addressing the social and emotional impacts of
            misinformation. [This project] will also design and implement a
            socio-technical platform that supports digital literacy
            interventionists.'' \2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2230616_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. This project fulfills Section 4(4) of the IOGAN Act. The
    purpose of the project is to educate the public to understand and
    process online information. The project focuses on co-designing
    culturally relevant digital literacy training with black and rural
    communities, as well as community colleges. This research also aligns
    with the guidance Congress gave NSF in the FY 2022 Appropriations,
    i.e., to work across disciplines to counter online influence operations
    by foreign adversaries by helping to create a more informed public with
    better skills to understand these operations.

        2. $5 million ongoing award to the University of Wisconsin.

      a.  ``[T]his project is a dynamic and flexible digital dashboard that
            will help end users . . . (1) identify trending misinformation
            networks on social media platforms . . . (2) strategically
            correct misinformation.'' ``[B]y the end of phase II, Course
            Correct intends to have further developed the digital dashboard
            in ways that could ultimately be adopted by other end users
            such as public health organizations, election administration
            officials (emphasis added), and commercial outlets.'' \3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2230692_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. This project fulfills Section 4(4) of the IOGAN Act. The
    purpose of the project is to create a system to identify emerging
    narratives based on unverified information and surface them to
    journalists, who can then decide whether or not to write stories about
    those narratives. This research also aligns with the guidance Congress
    gave NSF in the FY 2022 Appropriations, to work across disciplines to
    counter online influence operations by foreign adversaries, by
    identifying them and surfacing them to journalists who can inform the
    public about them.

        3. $5 million ongoing award to the George Washington University.

      a.  ``[T]his project addresses the links between two significant
            problems impacting trust in contemporary communication systems:
            (1) the broad and rapid spread of misinformation and (2) abuse
            and harassment directed at members of expert communities'' and
            ``create[s] a rapid-response socio-technical system that
            supports journalists and other experts facing online abuse and
            harassment.'' \4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2230683_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. This project fulfills Section 4(4) of the IOGAN Act. The
    purpose of the project is to create a system to support journalists and
    experts who inform the public about topics that are subject to
    manipulated media. This research also aligns with the guidance Congress
    gave NSF in the FY 2022 Appropriations, to work across disciplines to
    counter online influence operations by foreign adversaries by helping
    individuals who can help counter these operations when they are
    subsequently attacked for doing so.

        4. $505,017 ongoing award to the State University of New York.

      a.  ``[T]his project aims to address these challenges by
            transitioning a set of algorithms, software frameworks, and
            system designs out of the research lab into the hands of active
            practitioners to help identify and mitigate information
            manipulation (misinformation and dis-information).'' \5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2247867_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. The purpose of this award is to ensure the stability of the
    information ecosystem and educate future practitioners about
    fundamental software development skills in the areas of systems,
    machine learning, and data science. The project aims to design and
    develop a production capable, open-source software suite to enable the
    rapid collection, management, and analysis of social media data.

        5. $441,200 ongoing award to the University of Utah.

      a.  ``[T]o address these challenges, this project combines the
            complementary information processing strengths of humans and
            computation to transform the efficiency, effectiveness, and
            scale of fact-checking. The project can enable fact-checkers to
            spot misinformation early, prioritize effort, and unify the
            various tools and techniques used for fact-checking.'' \6\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2154123_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. The purpose of this award is to scale the work of human
    fact-checkers and boost information literacy in society. The project
    aims to use elements of security incident response (i.e., preparation,
    detection, containment, and post-incident activity) to transform the
    ad-hoc, time-consuming, and small-scale nature of current fact-checking
    practices.

        6. $396,000 ongoing award to New York University.

      a.  ``[T]o address these challenges, this project combines the
            complementary information processing strengths of humans and
            computation to transform the efficiency, effectiveness, and
            scale of fact-checking. The project can enable fact-checkers to
            spot misinformation early, prioritize effort, and unify the
            various tools and techniques used for fact-checking.'' \7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2154119_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. The purpose of this award is to scale the work of human
    fact-checkers and boost information literacy in society. The project
    aims to use elements of security incident response (i.e., preparation,
    detection, containment, and post-incident activity) to transform the
    ad-hoc, time-consuming, and small-scale nature of current fact-checking
    practices.

        7. $336,664 ongoing award to Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.

      a.  ``[U]nderstanding how information flows and its impact on human
            behavior is important for determining how to protect society
            from the effects of misinformation, propaganda, and ``fake
            news''. This project traces how information spreads on social
            media channels and how ideas, opinions, and beliefs change as
            they spread.'' \8\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2214216_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. The purpose of this award is to study how information flows
    on social media, to better understand how online social networks, with
    a high degree of public participation, shape public opinion. The
    project aims to develop a computational model of the information flow
    in social media that contrast with traditional news sources.

        8. $330,555 ongoing award to the University of Florida.

      a.  ``[D]espite decades of research, misinformation remains a serious
            threat as most technical mitigation methods focus on improving
            detection accuracy and fail to consider social and emotional
            perspectives. This project assists in enhancing information
            integrity by identifying influencing communities, agents, and
            culturally resonant information to identify tipping points in
            public dialogue on controversial issues and offering venues of
            user-centric interventions at scale.'' \9\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2323794_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. The purpose of this award is to move away from source-
    centric accuracy detection and debunking to focus on user-centric
    interventions. The project aims to develop novel deep learning models
    based on topology ML, which effectively predict heterogeneous social
    norm emergence for timely intervention, identify top trusted features
    for engagement, and temporal explainable artificial intelligence for
    transparent interaction with users.

        9. $225,669 ongoing award to Boston University.

      a.  ``[T]his project aims to address these challenges by
            transitioning a set of algorithms, software frameworks, and
            system designs out of the research lab into the hands of active
            practitioners to help identify and mitigate information
            manipulation (misinformation and dis-information).'' \10\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2247868_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. The purpose of this award is to move away from source-
    centric accuracy detection and debunking to focus on user-centric
    interventions. The project aims to develop novel deep learning models
    based on topology ML, which effectively predict heterogeneous social
    norm emergence for timely intervention, identify top trusted features
    for engagement, and temporal explainable artificial intelligence for
    transparent interaction with users.

        10. $224,033 ongoing award to the Illinois Institute of Technology.

      a.  ``[T]he project aims to study the scientific underpinnings of
            disinformation and develop a computational framework to
            attribute, detect, and explain disinformation to inform
            policymaking.'' \11\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \11\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2241068_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. The purpose of this award is to systematically investigate
    major data, provenance and explainability challenges in disinformation
    analysis. The project aims to develop new computational methods for
    multi-modal disinformation detection models that include images and
    social contexts, and for explainable disinformation detection models
    via the guidance of well-established social theories.

        11. $220,000 ongoing award to Syracuse University.

      a.  ``[T]he project aims to study the scientific underpinnings of
            disinformation and develop a computational framework to
            attribute, detect, and explain disinformation to inform
            policymaking.'' \12\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \12\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2241070_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. The purpose of this award is to systematically investigate
    major data, provenance and explainability challenges in disinformation
    analysis. The project aims to develop new computational methods for
    multi-modal disinformation detection models that include images and
    social contexts, and for explainable disinformation detection models
    via the guidance of well-established social theories.

        12. $217,000 ongoing award to the University of North Carolina at
    Charlotte.

      a.  ``[D]espite decades of research, misinformation remains a serious
            threat as most technical mitigation methods focus on improving
            detection accuracy and fail to consider social and emotional
            perspectives. This project assists in enhancing information
            integrity by identifying influencing communities, agents, and
            culturally resonant information to identify tipping points in
            public dialogue on controversial issues and offering venues of
            user-centric interventions at scale.'' \13\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \13\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2323795_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. The purpose of this award is to move away from source-
    centric accuracy detection and debunking to focus on user-centric
    interventions. The project aims to develop novel deep learning models
    based on topology Machine Learning that effectively predict
    heterogeneous social norm emergence for timely intervention, identify
    top trusted features for engagement, and temporal explainable
    artificial intelligence for transparent interaction with users.

        13. $120,008 ongoing award to the Georgia Tech Research
    Corporation.

      a.  ``[T]he general approach is to leverage the social responses that
            ordinary users make on online posts, such as supporting,
            questioning, disbelieving, or countering claims, to robustly
            detect misinformation and suggest corrective responses.'' \14\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \14\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2239879_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. The purpose of this award is to help everyday users
    effectively assess and respond to non-credible information. The project
    aims to build robust detection models that leverage graph neural
    networks, adversarial learning, and social network analysis.

        14. $155,967 ongoing award to the University of California, Santa
    Barbara.

      a.  ``[T]he project aims to study the scientific underpinnings of
            disinformation and develop a computational framework to
            attribute, detect, and explain disinformation to inform
            policymaking.'' \15\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \15\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2241069_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. The purpose of this award is to systematically investigate
    major data, provenance and explainability challenges in disinformation
    analysis. The project aims to develop new computational methods for
    multi-modal disinformation detection models that include images and
    social contexts, and for explainable disinformation detection models
    via the guidance of well-established social theories.

        15. $67,380 ongoing award to the Pennsylvania State University.

      a.  ``[T]he experience of the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the
            need to develop strong relationships and trust between the
            research community and these various constituencies before a
            crisis. The workshop will be organized around 3 sessions: 1)
            case studies of innovation and misinformation in focal
            pathogens and ``gain of function'' research, 2) communicating
            novelty and risk, 3) tailoring communication to different
            audiences . . . including lay public, agency, and
            policymakers.'' \16\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \16\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2319012_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. The purpose of this award is to teach graduate students and
    early career scientists' skills in communicating routine scientific
    advancements, specifically surrounding the microbiome in relation to
    health and food security. The workshop will include sessions on
    communication theory and practice, addressing misinformation, and
    communicating with a diverse audience.

        16. $38,515 ongoing award to the University of Houston.

      a.  ``[T[his . . . project is the development of an online dashboard
            with misinformation forecast trends and analysis to help
            address the misinformation endemic in America.'' \17\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \17\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2309846_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. This is an I-Corps Teams award, which is an award to
    support participation in an NSF entrepreneurial training program called
    the NSF Innovation Corps, or NSF I-CorpsTM, program. The
    funding does not support technical research but provides tools and
    knowledge to researchers in science and engineering fields to allow
    evaluation of the commercial potential of their technology. The PI, her
    students, and an industry mentor participated in the training program
    in the spring of 2022.
        This project fulfills Section 601 of the American Innovation and
    Competitiveness Act of 2017, which authorizes the NSF I-Corps program,
    and Sections 1 and 2 of the IOGAN Act. As noted above, the purpose of
    the project is to provide entrepreneurial education to a team of
    researchers interested in evaluating the commercial potential of their
    technology. Specifically, this I-Corps project is based on prior
    research on the development of automated data collection, data
    analytics, and deep learning methodologies with the goal of creating an
    application and associated website that centralizes up-to-date
    misinformation content and metrics. This research is responsive to
    Sections 1 and 2 of the IOGAN Act in that it is developing tools and
    technologies for authenticating information and detection of
    manipulated or synthesized content online. In addition, the prior
    research aligns with guidance Congress gave to NSF in the FY 2022
    Appropriations, which is to ``help counter influence from foreign
    adversaries on the Internet and social media platforms designed to
    influence U.S. perspectives, sow discord during times of pandemic and
    other emergencies, and undermine confidence in U.S. elections and
    institutions.''

        17. $21,003 ongoing award to the University of Alaska, Fairbanks.

      a.  ``[T]hough a small body of prior research on health
            misinformation exists, there is a pressing need to gain a
            better understanding of how to detect, monitor and understand
            misinformation and its impact on population health during
            emergencies. The project takes a one health approach,
            documenting perspectives of public health officials and
            healthcare providers on misinformation.'' \18\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \18\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2309906_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. This award supports a dissertation project exploring the
    role of misinformation in Alaska's response to the covid pandemic. As
    part of the emerging field of infodemiology, this project investigates
    the impacts of misinformation on public and individual health through
    interviews with health care providers and public health personnel.

        18. $16,014 ongoing award to the University of Oklahoma.

      a.  ``[T]he development of a software platform that may be integrated
            into crisis management systems such as public health (WHO,
            CDC), emergency management (FEMA), and transportation (DOT)
            agencies to facilitate the transmission of correct information
            and provide the option to notify social media providers of
            identified misinformation'' (emphasis added). ``It is becoming
            increasingly important for government agencies, policy makers,
            and emergency management officials to be capable of addressing
            major crisis scenarios under acute time and resource
            constraints. Using social media platforms more efficiently
            would be a critical step towards this vision.'' \19\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \19\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2222940_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. This is an I-Corps Teams award, which is an award to
    support participation in an NSF entrepreneurial training program called
    the NSF Innovation Corps, or NSF I-CorpsTM, program. The
    funding does not support technical research but provides tools and
    knowledge to researchers in science and engineering fields to allow
    evaluation of the commercial potential of their technology. The PI, his
    student, and an industry mentor participated in the training program in
    the winter of 2021.
        This project fulfills Section 601 of the American Innovation and
    Competitiveness Act of 2017, which authorizes the NSF I-Corps program,
    and Sections 1, 2, and 5 of the IOGAN Act. As noted above, the purpose
    of the project is to provide entrepreneurial education to a team of
    researchers interested in evaluating the commercial potential of their
    technology. Specifically, this I-Corps project is based on prior
    research on the development of a software platform that may be
    integrated into crisis management systems such as public health (WHO,
    CDC), emergency management (FEMA), and transportation (DOT) agencies to
    facilitate the transmission of correct information and provide the
    option to notify social media providers of identified misinformation.
    This research is responsive to Sections 1, 2, and 5 of the IOGAN Act in
    that it is developing tools and technologies for authenticating
    information and detection of manipulated or synthesized content online
    (Sections 1 and 2); and coordinated with other Federal agencies and
    programs (Section 5). In addition, this prior research aligns with
    guidance Congress gave to NSF in the FY 2022 Appropriations, which is
    to ``help counter influence from foreign adversaries on the Internet
    and social media platforms designed to influence U.S. perspectives, sow
    discord during times of pandemic and other emergencies, and undermine
    confidence in U.S. elections and institutions.''

        19. $11,485 completed award to Texas State University.

      a.  ``[T]his . . . project is the development of an online dashboard
            with misinformation forecast trends and analysis to help
            address the misinformation endemic in America.'' \20\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \20\ See USASpending, NSF, https://www.usaspending.gov/award/
    ASST_NON_2223343_4900
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Answer. Please note that this I-Corps award is the same as number
    16 above. The original award was made to Texas State University under
    PI Zhijie (Sasha) Dong. I-Corps Award 2223343 was the original award
    and 2309846 is a PI Transfer Award to the University of Houston.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to
                          Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan
    Geographic Diversity of Research and Innovation Funding
        A major theme of the CHIPS and Science Act was the need to increase
    Federal research and development funding. In particular, NSF was
    singled out to increase the percentage of spending from key research
    accounts that goes to historically underfunded states. Provisions to
    ensure geographic diversity were also included in key Commerce programs
    included in the CHIPS and Science Act.

        Question 1. You mention in your written testimony that the
    Foundation has slightly exceeded the 15.5 percent FY2023 funding
    allocation goal for EPSCoR states. What challenges, if any, does the
    Foundation face in meeting or exceeding these goals in future years?
        Answer. NSF is dedicated to meeting and exceeding these goals in
    future years. The primary challenge to doing so is receiving an
    increase in meritorious proposal submissions from EPSCoR jurisdictions
    to facilitate the increasing investment rates. To mitigate this
    challenge, NSF's EPSCoR and GRANTED programs are designed to support
    EPSCoR jurisdictions in building their research capacity, resulting in
    pathways to sustainability and research funding support as well as
    support with the proposal preparation and award management processes.
    Workforce Challenges for High-Demand Fields
        Question 1. How is the Foundation working to ensure that our Nation
    can recruit, educate, and retain the world's brightest minds that will
    move our technology-driven economy forward through advancement in AI,
    quantum computing, and other key technologies?
        Answer. The NSF Research Traineeship (NRT) Program explores model
    pathways for graduate students in research-based master's and doctoral
    degree programs to develop the skills, knowledge, and competencies
    needed to pursue a range of STEM careers. The program is especially
    focused on effective training of STEM graduate students in high
    priority interdisciplinary or convergent research areas, through a
    comprehensive traineeship model that is innovative, evidence-based, and
    aligned with changing workforce and research needs. The program has
    called out Artificial Intelligence and Quantum Information Science and
    Engineering as priority areas since 2020 (see NSF 21-536). Also, a
    recent NSF news item highlights recent NRT investments in ethical AI:
    https://new.nsf.gov/funding/initiatives/nrt/advancing-ethical-ai-
    through-convergent-research.
        For example, at Kansas State University, researchers are directing
    a project, ``Preparing Future Leaders: Rural Resource Resiliency,''
    which trains students to become science-based leaders and advocates for
    resilient rural communities by combining engineering, economics, and
    sociological knowledge to meet the needs of farmers, industry, and
    society. Students engage with farmers, government and industry through
    interactive sessions and develop relevant skills through innovative
    coursework and teamwork. This comprehensive program anticipates
    training fifty (50) master's and doctoral students, including twenty-
    five (25) funded trainees, from the colleges of engineering, arts and
    sciences, and agriculture.
        Another team of researchers at the University of New Mexico is
    leading ``Quantum Photonics Interdisciplinary Training to Advance
    Quantum Technologies (QPAQT),'' which is addressing the need for cross-
    disciplinary graduate training in quantum photonics for students with
    diverse undergraduate backgrounds. The program anticipates preparing
    175 students, including 25 funded trainees, to become generalists in
    quantum technologies hardware. The tools and academic training provided
    will prepare trainees for a wide variety of careers in semiconductor
    and quantum technologies.
        Since 2019, the NRT program has funded 15 AI awards/projects. An
    additional 10 awards/projects also incorporate aspects of AI in their
    training. During this same period the program has funded 12 awards
    related to quantum science/computing.
        NSF has developed an expansive and inclusive range of workforce
    development programs, broadly supporting science and engineering,
    including learners in K-12 schools, community colleges, and
    universities, as well as reskilling for current workers and upskilling
    for those seeking to enter the workforce in new and emerging areas.
    Below are some examples of these programs. Importantly, these programs
    do not represent an exhaustive list of NSF-funded workforce development
    programs, but instead a sampling especially well aligned with key
    technology focus areas.
        Advanced Technological Education (ATE)--invests in advanced
    technician training supporting nearly 40,000 students and 9,000
    teachers annually.
        NSF Scholarships in Science, Technology, Engineering, and
    Mathematics (S-STEM)--provides scholarships for low-income,
    academically talented students and has supported more than 100,000
    students across the Nation since 2006.
        Experiential Learning for Emerging and Novel Technologies
    (ExLENT)--provides practical experiences in emerging technologies and
    will support hundreds of students in 2023.
        Non-Academic Research Internships for Graduate Students (INTERN)--
    supports more than 300 NSF-funded graduate students each year to
    provide experiential opportunities to prepare students for careers in
    industry and other non-academic environments.
        Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU)--supports more than
    6,000 students each year to conduct intensive, semi-independent
    research projects, mentored by faculty and other experienced STEM
    professionals.
        CSGrad4US Fellowships, eFellows, and MPS-Ascend--seek to increase
    the number and diversity of students engaging in advanced degree
    programs and post-doctoral experiences. CSGrad4US fellowships focus on
    graduate students. MPS-Ascend and eFellows focus on post-doctoral
    researchers.
        Supplements for Semiconductor Fabrication and Prototyping--provides
    NSF-funded researchers and educators funding to expand researcher and
    student access to semiconductor fabrication experiences. These
    opportunities can be viewed as a scalable crosscut across the programs
    listed above, and others.
        NSF Entrepreneurial Fellowships--provide up to two years of support
    to Ph.D.-trained scientists and engineers from a variety of backgrounds
    and regions across the U.S. with stipends plus access to specialized
    research facilities and equipment to advance their prototypes, refine
    their business models, build their teams, and secure follow-on money.
        NSF and its current partners are investing more than $350 million
    annually in the above programs.
        NSF also invests in capacity-building at institutions of higher
    education in key technology focus areas:
        ExpandAI--This program supports capacity-development projects and
    partnerships within the National AI Research Institutes ecosystem that
    help broaden participation in artificial intelligence research,
    education and workforce development.
        ExpandQISE--This program supports research and training that will
    lead to scientific and engineering breakthroughs in quantum information
    science and engineering, while broadening participation and securing a
    talent pipeline matched to the needs of this emerging field.
        The above constitutes a sampling of our educational offerings.
    Computational Power
        Question 1. Given the tremendous computational capacity that has
    developed in the private sector, in part thanks to Federal basic
    research investments, does it make more sense to provide support for
    academic and government scientists to have access to cloud compute
    resources, rather than building new supercomputers and expanding
    Federal hardware assets?
        Answer. NSF provides the research community with access to the
    computational and data systems that are best suited for their diverse
    domains of research and which allow the broad research community to
    maximize its scientific output. For the foreseeable future, this will
    require a combination of diverse agency-supported on-site large-scale
    systems and support for access to commercial cloud resources. There are
    two reasons for this. First, agency-supported computing resources are
    optimized and operated specifically for scientific use, leading to high
    scientific productivity. Second, the present demand for GPUs, the
    dominant technology used for AI computations, is immense and commercial
    cloud prices are high and can be considerably more expensive than our
    on-site supercomputing centers.
        NSF provides tens of thousands of researchers access to advanced
    computational, AI and data systems at university-based high-performance
    computing centers and sites distributed across the Nation. These
    resources provide not only compute cycles to researchers, but also
    provide the Nation a reservoir and training ground for critical
    skillsets needed for national leadership in computing including the
    know-how, expertise, and ability to touch and configure hardware,
    software, and networking systems for research purposes. The academic
    institution-based computing centers that house the largest NSF-
    supported computational systems are research and development
    laboratories on their own. These centers support novel uses of
    cyberinfrastructure, co-designing experiments such as the collaboration
    between San Diego Supercomputing Center and the WIFIRE project that
    investigates using digital sensors to detect wildfires and aid human
    decision making in interventions. These high-performance computing
    sites also provide a community for computational researchers nationwide
    to get help with code optimization and debugging, provide trainings and
    education for students and new users, and provide a clearing house for
    best practices learned in different computational domains. Providing
    access to computational systems is only one aspect necessary to
    effectively conduct computational research. We are investigating how
    these critical community capabilities would need to be adapted with a
    growing use of the commercial cloud for research.
        NSF recognizes the growing role of the commercial cloud in the
    computing ecosystem and notes that there are new technologies, only
    available in the commercial cloud, to which NSF-supported researchers
    must have access. NSF supports commercial cloud usage through awarded
    grants, and, more recently, NSF awarded a pilot program CloudBank,
    which is a cloud access entity that helps the NSF research community
    access and use public clouds for research and education by delivering a
    set of managed services designed to simplify access to public clouds.
    CloudBank is now supporting 250 projects using the commercial cloud and
    is providing critical lessons learned and insights as NSF considers the
    rapidly growing capabilities in the commercial cloud.
        The high-end computing and commercial cloud market are currently
    undergoing rapid disruption. Companies that historically had supported
    on-site supercomputing deployments are entering the cloud computing
    market and cloud companies are now deploying their cloud-based systems
    on-site at customer locations. Many of the techniques to manage and run
    on-site and cloud-based systems are merging. NSF is closely tracking
    these developments and their implications for the research community.
        Finally, as part of the National AI Research Resource (NAIRR)
    Pilot, NSF will be partnering closely with both on-site supercomputing
    centers as well as commercial cloud providers to demonstrate the value
    and impact of the NAIRR concept. Through these partnerships we will
    gain invaluable experience that will shape the direction of how the
    research community accesses a variety of computational and data
    resources.
    Quantum Computing
        Question 1 Are we at the point with Quantum computing that NSF or
    NIST or another Federal agency should be developing metrics to
    determine efficacy and efficiency of quantum computations?
        Answer. Having an established set of benchmarks will be essential
    to track progress and enable performance comparisons of quantum
    computing systems. However, the field of quantum computing is currently
    advancing so rapidly that it is not yet clear what measures will be
    most appropriate. Because of their proximity to the latest scientific
    and technology developments, the research community driving these
    advances is currently in the best position to explore these common
    benchmarks. That community includes researchers funded by NSF,
    industry, and other government agencies. Possible avenues for initial
    coordination on benchmarks could include the National Quantum
    Coordination Office (NQCO), the NQI Advisory Committee, and the non-
    governmental Quantum Economic Development Consortium.
    Workforce Challenges for Domestic Superconducting Ecosystem
        Question 1. What are the workforce shortfalls in establishing a
    viable domestic superconducting ecosystem and how is NSF working to
    address this need?
        Answer. NSF has several programs that address both fundamental
    science and workforce shortfalls to advance a vibrant domestic
    superconducting ecosystem. The main programs that contribute and
    support advancing fundamental science as well as workforce capacity
    development across the workforce spectrum in the superconductor space
    are: the Condensed Matter Physics (CMP) and Condensed Matter and
    Materials Theory (CMMT) Programs, Designing Materials to Revolutionize
    and Engineer our Future (DMREF) Program, Materials Research Science and
    Engineering Centers (MRSEC) Program, Partnerships for Research and
    Education in Materials (PREM) Program, and National High-Magnetic Field
    Laboratory (NHMFL) national facility.
    DOC and NSF Coordination--
        Question 1. In light of the MOU announced on July 26 to improve
    coordination between EDA and NSF on the Tech Hubs and NSF Engines
    programs, what specific steps are NSF and DOC taking to avoid
    duplication between these two programs?
        Answer. NSF and EDA are closely collaborating on our investments
    through the NSF Engines and EDA Tech Hubs programs. For example, NSF
    program staff were engaged by EDA in the review of their Tech Hubs
    proposals, and vice-versa. NSF and EDA have shared information about
    proposals and prospective awards. And NSF and EDA are sharing knowledge
    and best practices on evaluation and assessment at the project and
    program levels.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Dan Sullivan to
                          Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan
        The CHIPS Act provides the National Science Foundation several
    prominent roles, including fostering U.S. growth and research in 10 key
    technology focus areas. One of those areas is ``advanced energy and
    industrial efficiency technologies''.
        Helpfully this term is already defined in statute: ``advanced
    energy technologies'' are defined as technologies that ``enhance the
    energy independence and security of the United States by enabling
    improved or expanded supply and production of domestic energy
    resources, including coal, oil, and natural gas.'' (42 USC 18632, the
    Dept. of Energy Research and Innovation Act (2018)).
        In February 2023, I--along with Senators Wicker, Cornyn, and
    Young--wrote to you and emphasized this definition. We urged you to
    follow congressional intent and include fossil fuel energy technologies
    in NSF's focus areas in addition to renewables. Unfortunately, your
    response to our letter skirted the issue and instead reiterated that
    ``our Nation's future depends on winning the research, innovation,
    translation, and education race to transform the energy sector.''
        America's abundant energy resources are crucial to our economy and
    national security, especially given the current geopolitical climate. A
    speedy and faithful implementation of the CHIPS Act--including
    fostering advanced energy technologies like coal, oil, and natural
    gas--will go a long way toward enhancing the energy independence and
    security of the United States.

        Question 1. Will you clearly state whether the NSF will foster U.S.
    growth and research in advanced energy technologies, including coal,
    oil, and natural gas, in accordance with congressional intent?

        Question 2. Will you commit to have the NSF be neutral to energy
    source when fostering advanced energy technologies?
        Answer to 1 & 2. NSF remains committed, via its merit review
    process, to supporting energy technology investments that support high-
    risk, high-reward research ideas across the science and engineering
    spectrum that create broad new understanding and enable future
    innovations.

        The CHIPS Act requires the Director of the NSF to address five
    ``societal, national, and geostrategic challenges'' to ``guide [NSF's]
    activities,'' including ``climate change and environmental
    sustainability'' and ``inequitable access to education, opportunity, or
    other services.'' This provision seemingly gives you substantial
    discretion to insert these ``societal'' and ``climate'' challenges into
    the NSF's work.

        Question 1. Can you commit that you will not use any of these
    challenges including ``climate change and environmental
    sustainability'' to curtail research and innovation in oil and gas?
        Answer. Through its merit review process, the National Science
    Foundation (NSF) ensures that proposals submitted are reviewed in a
    fair, competitive, transparent, and in-depth manner. Merit review
    remains at the heart of NSF's enterprise. It identifies portfolios of
    ideas for funding in accord with two merit review criteria--
    Intellectual Merit (IM) and Broader Impacts (BI). NSF's merit review
    process remains the gold standard in the allocation of the agency's
    annual resources to support U.S. basic scientific research and programs
    to strengthen scientific research potential and science education
    programs at all levels throughout the United States and worldwide. Our
    goal is to fund awards with integrity in a fair, competitive, and
    transparent process. NSF's mechanisms for assessing merit review
    includes the utilization of external advisory committees, reports from
    Committees of Visitors (COVs), and biennial surveys of proposers and
    reviewers.
        The United States is currently the world-leader in AI development,
    deployment, and innovation, but during a committee hearing last month
    on transparency in Artificial Intelligence, witnesses explained that
    other nations are ``working harder than ever to develop the next major
    technological developments in AI. . .''
        The thought of losing our lead in AI development raises a number of
    alarm bells for my colleagues and I, particularly if our lead is lost
    to an adversarial power like China. In briefings and roundtables that
    Congress has had on this topic, it has been estimated that China is
    somewhere between one-and-a-half to two years behind us in AI
    capabilities, however the recent explosion in popularity of generative
    AI has renewed their focus on this race. In fact, this summer the
    Chinese began working on the development of their own lithography
    machines for printing the high-tech chips needed for AI computing.

        Question 1. What role does the CHIPS Act, and the Department of
    Commerce more broadly, have in maintaining U.S. superiority in AI
    development?
        Answer. The CHIPS and Science Act laid out a roadmap for addressing
    the intense global competition for leadership in the technologies of
    today like AI and for seeding the industries of tomorrow. NSF is one of
    the largest non-defense investor in AI research in the Federal
    government, and the CHIPS and Science act proposed greatly increasing
    NSF's ability to invest in innovative ideas through the Regional
    Innovation Engines and other programs. However, without appropriations
    at the President's Budget Request level, we risk allowing our
    competitors to capitalize on innovations we do not invest in.

        Question 2. Do you see any logical supply chain or computing power
    chokepoints relevant to the Department of Commerce that could be used
    to slow down China's development of AI technology?
        Answer. NSF defers to the Department of Commerce.
                                     ______

      Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Marsha Blackburn to
                          Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan
        Question 1. How are you coordinating your activities with the
    national laboratories? What are the potential areas for collaboration
    with the national laboratories?
        Answer. In January of this year, NSF and DOE's Office of Science
    signed a memorandum of understanding that will enable increased
    partnerships to address some of our most important challenges. This MOU
    builds upon previous partnerships and provides opportunities for
    collaboration on biotechnology, quantum, advanced manufacturing,
    engineering, artificial intelligence and machine learning.
        NSF and DOE's robust partnership includes access to various NSF-
    and DOE-managed multi-user facilities around the globe. One recent
    success from that partnership is the NSF-supported work of researchers
    at the University of South Carolina who collaborated with the DOE's
    Sandia National Laboratories. The researchers have created a new type
    of porous material with unique nanoscale properties that can
    potentially enable superior hydrogen storage solutions--an innovation
    that would be useful for fuel cells used in vehicles, backup power
    supplies and other applications.
        The NSF and DOE work together on many important projects, including
    the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory (NHMFL). The NHMFL is the
    largest and most powerful magnet facility in the world, and it is used
    by scientists from all over the globe to conduct research in a wide
    range of fields. The NSF supported NHMFL is located at three different
    sites: Florida State University, the University of Florida, and the DOE
    Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). Each site has its own unique
    capabilities, and together they work to advance our understanding of
    high magnetic fields and their applications, which may lead to the
    technologies and scientific solutions of tomorrow.
        An additional success from this partnership is an NSF-DOE-supported
    award for Accelerating Innovations in Biomanufacturing Approaches
    through Collaboration Between NSF and the DOE BETO funded Agile
    BioFoundry, a consortium of national laboratories dedicated to
    accelerating biomanufacturing and decarbonizing the economy.
        University of Georgia researchers and DOE's Agile BioFoundry will
    work to increase understanding of the metabolic pathways that allow a
    novel microorganism to produce hexanoic acid, that can be engineered to
    create sustainable aviation fuel among a host of other carbon neutral
    products.
        Another example of the NSF-DOE partnership is the newly awarded
    Synchrotron for Earth and Environmental Science (SEES) facility to the
    University of Chicago. SEES provides researchers access to a suite of
    analytical instrument capabilities at synchrotron beam sources across
    the country, including Argonne National Laboratory, Lawrence Berkely
    National Laboratory, Brookhaven National Laboratory and SLAC National
    Accelerator Laboratory. The facility enables a range of research from
    critical mineral formation to natural hazards mediation to future
    technological advancements and human health.

        Question 2. Team TN recently secured an NSF Regional Innovation
    Engines Development award for Advancing Technology-Enabled Mobility
    Solutions.

        a. Please tell me how NSF will support open innovation platforms
    and testbeds?
        Answer. The CHIPS and Science Act authorized TIP to establish a
    program supporting Test Beds. This program will support the
    development, operation, integration, deployment, and demonstration of
    new, innovative critical technologies for users from academia and
    industry. A test bed could include hardware or software, or both, and
    would provide broad access to a wide range of users. One key goal is to
    increase participation by populations that are underrepresented in
    STEM. Another key goal is to encourage participation by innovators and
    entrepreneurs and the development of new businesses.
        TIP has already initiated one test beds program, the National
    Quantum Virtual Laboratory (NQVL), in the key technology focus area of
    quantum information science. Subject to future appropriations, TIP will
    expand the test beds opportunity to encompass additional key technology
    areas.

        b. How will the NSF help accelerate tech transfer to industry to
    promote entrepreneurship?
        Answer. NSF has a range of programs that serve to accelerate
    technology translation from the lab to the market and society. For
    example, upon its inception, TIP brought together NSF's Lab-to-Market
    program, spanning:

       Partnerships for Innovation (PFI), which provides NSF-funded
            researchers the opportunity to increase the impact of their
            discoveries by teaching researchers how to develop and
            implement a technology roadmap, create a business model, and
            develop their technology into a prototype or proof of concept;

       NSF Innovation Corps (NSF I-CorpsTM), which
            experiential entrepreneurial education to further the Nation's
            innovation ecosystem; I-Corps connects the technological,
            entrepreneurial and business communities--addressing skill and
            knowledge gaps to reduce the time it takes to bring
            technologies from the lab to the marketplace; and

       NSF Small Business Innovation Research/Small Business
            Technology Transfer (SBIR/STTR) programs, which invest in
            hundreds of early-stage startups annually, transforming
            scientific discovery into products and services with commercial
            and societal impact. America's Seed Fund, powered by NSF,
            supports startups and small businesses working across almost
            all areas of science and technology. Each company can receive
            up to $2 million to support research and development.
        Additionally, NSF is expanding into other technology translation
    pathways, such as open-source ecosystems.

        Question 3. Please tell me how you will prioritize EDA Tech Hub
    partnerships to produce faster routes from research to actual
    commercialization?
        Answer. Here are some of the specific ways we're working to drive
    that work and how we're doing it with our partners at the Economic
    Development Administration, specifically with the Regional Technology
    and Innovation Hubs (Tech Hubs):

       Our team has recently executed an agreement and partnership
            with the Economic Development Administration focused on
            regional innovation collaboration to better coordinate our
            investments and leverage a whole-of-government approach to our
            respective investment programs. This allows coordination on
            investment decisions as well as shared data and insights. NSF
            participated in the technical review process for the Tech Hubs
            designations, providing technical and R&D insight as EDA sought
            to identify the strongest Tech Hubs designees.

       For the NSF Regional Innovation Engines program, we have
            built a post-award support platform informed by technical
            assistance conducted by the Economic Development Administration
            as well as private-sector models. The NSF Engines Builder
            Platform is a human-centered portfolio of support structures
            that empowers awardees with the tools, skills, networks, and
            capital needed to thrive. This is an entirely new way of
            thinking about post-award support in the Federal context. It's
            inspired and informed by the support systems pioneered by
            venture incubators and accelerators, national philanthropy, and
            lessons learned from prior place-based investment efforts. This
            will be a vital tool in connecting innovation ecosystems and
            place-based investments to the supports they need to facilitate
            translation. These resources will support our forthcoming NSF
            Engines awardees as well as our previously announced
            Development Awardees. Key programmatic leadership from the
            Economic Development Administration's Tech Hubs program (as
            well as other programs) were included in our selection process
            for this platform to ensure cross-agency alignment.

       Through the Builder Platform, NSF will also work to identify
            alignment, create topical communities of practice, and shared
            investment opportunities where there is topical synergy between
            a Tech Hub and an NSF Engine or NSF Development Awardee. For
            example, identifying collaboration opportunities between the
            Tennessee-based Advancing Technology-Enabled Mobility Solutions
            NSF Development Awardee led by a variety of Tennessee-based
            educational and research institutions--including Vanderbilt, UT
            Knoxville, UT Chattanooga, Tennessee Tech University, as well
            as UT-Oak Ridge Innovation Institute, and others--and the
            multiple EDA Tech Hubs focused on the development of advanced
            lithium and EV batteries as well as autonomous vehicles in New
            York, Nevada, and Oklahoma. NSF has already identified and
            onboarded a lead organization to launch the Builder Platform
            and expects services and collaboration opportunities with Tech
            Hubs to roll out to awardees in January 2024.

       Finally, NSF is in the early phases of discussions with the
            Economic Development Administration and the Small Business
            Administration's Office of Investment and Innovation to explore
            co-creating pathways for NSF Regional Innovation Engines and
            Tech Hubs awardees to engage existing SBA translational
            programs with targeted programming and supports.

        These are just a few of the ways EDA and NSF are working together
    and we're committed to expanding that coordination in the months and
    years ahead as we make generational investments in our Nation's ability
    to compete on the global stage and as we work to collectively bolster
    our national defense and advance our Nation's national security goals.

        Question 4. The Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce
    Development projects that Tennessee will experience significant growth
    in STEM occupations over the next decade. What programs does NSF have
    that could support Tennessee's efforts?
        Answer. NSF helps contribute to growth in STEM occupations
    throughout the United States by funding projects across the agency that
    provide support for students and postdocs.
        The Advanced Technological Education (ATE) program is the focal
    point for NSF's investments to bolster the preparation of the skilled
    technical workforce--the sector of jobs that require more than a high
    school diploma but less than a bachelor's degree. ATE provides grants
    to improve technician education at community colleges and in the Career
    and Technical Education (CTE) programs in high schools. The program
    seeks, in particular, to improve technician education in high-tech
    fields that drive the economy--biotech, cybersecurity, advanced
    manufacturing, microelectronics, semiconductor manufacturing, electric
    vehicle manufacturing, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, etc.
    ATE reaches nearly 40,000 students and 9,000 teachers annually.
        Notable projects include:

       ``Preparing the Workforce for Industry 4.0s Intelligent
            Industrial Robotics,'' a collaboration among three
            institutions: University of Tennessee--Chattanooga, Motlow
            State Community College, and Chattanooga State Community
            College. This project is focusing on defining the necessary
            skillset for the next-generation industrial robotics technical
            workforce and creating a curriculum that will allow students to
            learn those skills. This project will result in one of the
            first programs in the Nation for workforce training in
            intelligent robotics and artificial intelligence technologies,
            and it will support U.S. businesses and industries to rapidly
            and effectively incorporate next-generation robotics in the
            workplace.

       ``Integrating Electric Vehicle (EV) Technology in Legacy
            Automotive Programs'' is a project at Northeast State Community
            College (NSCC). As EV technology continues to advance at a
            rapid pace and the number of electric vehicles on the road
            continues to increase, multiple training programs are needed
            including those that are integrated into legacy automotive
            programs to address the growing need for EV maintenance and
            repair technicians. This project is investigating the
            effectiveness of and documenting the unique challenges
            associated with integrating EV technology into a legacy
            automotive training program. Outcomes of this effort will
            include faculty professional development, a job skills
            analysis, and curricular revisions, all of which will improve
            outcomes for students in the high need area served by NSCC.

       To better meet industry needs for a highly-skilled technical
            workforce, this project at Roane State Community College,''
            Improving Mechatronics Education by Pairing Mechatronics
            Courses with General Education Math and Science Courses,'' is
            enhancing general education courses with mechatronics-related
            problems and examples, thus providing a context that is
            relevant to the students' career goals. Local area employers
            are integrally involved in course development and provide
            examples of complex mechatronics issues that can be
            incorporated into problem-based learning scenarios within the
            courses. A collateral benefit of this approach is that non-
            mechatronic students in these courses gain exposure to and an
            appreciation of topics and applications that are useful for
            their employment in STEM-adjacent fields.
                                     ______

         Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Todd Young to
                          Dr. Sethuraman Panchanathan
        The Section 10339B of the CHIPS and Science Act requires that a
    recipient institution of higher education, a foundation of the
    institution, and related entities must submit an annual ``summary
    document'' of financial support which is $50,000 or more from a foreign
    source associated with a foreign country of concern. We have heard
    stakeholder concerns that NSF's proposed rule would require
    institutions to report each individual gift or contract over $50,000
    rather than a summary.

        Question 1. Do you believe that your proposed rule is in agreement
    with the statutory text?
        Answer. NSF believes that our proposed rule is in agreement with
    the statutory text. After comprehensive agency review, NSF released the
    proposed rule for public comment. In response to public comment, NSF
    reduced the data reporting requirement to fewer elements and has
    reviewed these data elements with several professional societies
    representing the university community. NSF feels it has achieved the
    appropriate balance between requiring the information necessary for
    data robustness and alleviating as much administrative burden as
    possible.

        Question 2. If so, what are you doing to alleviate stakeholder
    concerns?
        Answer. NSF has been meeting with professional societies to
    consider ways to help mitigate the administrative burden associated
    with this new reporting requirement, provide clarity on what
    ``financial support'' is scoped out of the reporting requirement, and
    solicit feedback on how the Foundation can develop the IT reporting
    system to minimize burden for the research community.

        Question 3. Furthermore, the NSF's proposed rule, if implemented,
    would represent an increase in reporting requirements compared to
    similar requirements such as the mandate under Section 117 of the
    Higher Education Act--how will the additional reporting requirements
    ensure that Federal research funding is not siphoned into foreign
    countries of concern?
        Answer. Through the creation of this reporting requirement, NSF
    will now have a mechanism to review ``financial support'' to recipient
    institutes of higher education (IHEs) in the forms of gifts and
    contracts that have conditions or ``strings attached'' that could seek
    to influence IHE's decision-making process as it relates to Federal
    research funding. By creating more transparency in this process, the
    Foundation will now have the authority to assess if/when potential
    foreign influence is being exerted on recipient IHEs that could result
    in Federal research funding being siphoned to foreign countries of
    concern.

        Question 4. Do you believe the additional reporting requirements
    will create a significant administrative burden for recipient
    institutions?
        Answer. NSF is structuring the reporting requirements to ensure
    robust data collection with as little administrative burden as
    possible. The Foundation believes it may be helpful to reevaluate this
    reporting requirement in two or three years to evaluate the benefit to
    research security and ensure we focus on reduced administrative burden
    to IHEs.