[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 50 (Thursday, April 24, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H1804-H1808]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 
                                  1997

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 127 and rule 
XXIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 1274.

                              {time}  1101


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole 
House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 
1274) to authorize appropriations for the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and for other 
purposes, with Mr. Duncan in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner] and 
the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Gordon] each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. 
Sensenbrenner].
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Mr. SENSENBRENNER asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to present H.R. 1274, 
the National Institute of Standards and Technology Authorization Act of 
1997.
  I would like to thank and congratulate the subcommittee chairwoman, 
the gentlewoman from Maryland [Mrs. Morella] and the ranking member, 
the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Gordon] for crafting such a fine 
bill.
  H.R. 1274 authorizes all the programs under the Technology 
Administration in the Department of Commerce that require 
appropriations for fiscal years 1998 and 1999. The Technology 
Administration includes the Office of the Under Secretary and the 
Office of Technology Policy in NIST, which is responsible for the vast 
majority of programs that make up the Technology Administration.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1274 is a fiscally responsible bill. It authorizes 
$609 million for fiscal 1998, a decrease of over $92 million, or 13 
percent from the administration's request.
  In fiscal year 1999 the bill authorizes a total of $628 million, 
again $116 million or 16 percent below the administration's projected 
budget.
  While spending less than the administration requested, the bill 
manages to do more. In authorizing NIST programs, the bill prioritizes 
funding for NIST laboratory functions, increasing their funding by 5 
percent for fiscal 1998 and 3 percent for fiscal 1999, while reducing 
funding for lower priority programs such as the advanced technology 
program, and providing no funding for new administration initiatives 
such as the experimental program to stimulate competitive technology, 
or EPSCOT, for short.
  Specifically, the bill authorizes $278.6 million for NIST laboratory 
activities in fiscal 1998 and $286.9 million in fiscal 1999. The NIST 
laboratories have been called the crown jewel of the Technology 
Administration, and H.R. 1274 will help ensure that they have 
sufficient funding to continue their vital work of safeguarding the 
accuracy of standards necessary for domestic and international 
commerce.
  H.R. 1274 includes $117.8 million for the manufacturing extension 
program in fiscal 1998 and $111.3 million in fiscal 1999. These totals 
will allow for full funding of all 75 existing MEP centers and will 
cover the administrative costs associated with running the program.
  The bill also reforms and authorizes reduced funding for ATP in 
fiscal 1998 and fiscal 1999. ATP is authorized at $185 million in 1998 
and $150 million in fiscal 1999. These levels represent decreases of 
$40 million and $75 million, respectively, from the fiscal year 1997 
appropriated total of $225 million. The bill further reforms the 
program's match requirements, requiring a 60 percent match from all 
joint venture grant recipients and non-small business single awardees.
  To ensure that ATP grants are not simply displacing private capital, 
the bill also contains language requiring a review of ATP applications 
to ensure that an ATP grant is actually required in order to enable the 
project to go forward.
  Finally, the bill authorizes funding for NIST critical maintenance 
and construction needs for fiscal 1998 and fiscal 1999. In order to 
ensure that construction funding is used in the most appropriate 
manner, H.R. 1274 includes a certification requirement precluding the 
Department from obligating any money to new construction unless it 
meets the requirements of NIST's new facilities plan.
  Accordingly, the authorization language includes provisions to reduce 
scientific research earmarks, to require the Committee on Science to 
receive notice of any reprogramming of NIST funds, and to express the 
sense of Congress that NIST should address the year 2000 computer date 
field program.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1274 is a sound bill. It is fiscally responsible, 
and will help ensure that NIST programs, which

[[Page H1805]]

are some of our Nation's most important technology research and 
development programs, receive the funding they require during the next 
2 fiscal years.
  I encourage all my colleagues to join me in supporting the National 
Institute of Science and Technology Authorization Act of 1997.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GORDON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1274, the National Institute 
of Standards and Technology Authorization Act of 1997. This bill 
authorizes all the programs in the Technology Administration, including 
the programs of the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
  H.R. 1274 represents bipartisan agreement on a sensible U.S. science 
and technology policy. As Chairman Sensenbrenner stated, the bill 
before us today represents a number of changes to H.R. 1274 as 
introduced. I want to thank the chairman, the gentleman from Wisconsin 
[Mr. Sensenbrenner] and the gentlewoman from Maryland [Mrs. Morella] 
for working with us to resolve some of our concerns.
  My remaining reservation about H.R. 1274 centers around the funding 
level for the Advanced Technology Program. The funding level allows 
only for a modest number of new awards to be made in 1998, and allows 
for no new awards in 1999. Both authorization levels represent 
significant cuts below the fiscal year 1996 and fiscal year 1997 
appropriated levels. One of the criticisms of the ATP has been the lack 
of thorough evaluation of the program. I would like to point out that 
this is a relatively new program, and only 42 projects have been 
completed.
  In addition, the ATP has not had stable funding. As a result, we do 
not have the hard data needed to evaluate this program objectively and 
rationally.
  With this reservation, I support H.R. 1274, which moves overall U.S. 
policy in the right direction. I urge my colleagues to support this 
bill, as well.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume 
to the gentlewoman from Maryland [Mrs. Morella], who is the chair of 
the subcommittee.
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the full 
Committee on Science for yielding the time to me, and for the 
leadership that he has shown and that the gentleman from California 
[Mr. Brown] as ranking member has shown on that committee.
  I rise today in support of H.R. 1274, the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology Authorization Act of 1997, legislation that I 
introduced on April 10 of this year. The bill is, as has been 
mentioned, truly bipartisan. It has been cosponsored by the gentleman 
from California [Mr. Brown], the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Gordon], 
the ranking members of both the full committee and the Subcommittee on 
Technology, as well as the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Ehlers], the 
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Davis], and the gentlewoman from Texas 
[Ms. Jackson-Lee], all distinguished members of the Committee on 
Science.
  NIST is the Nation's oldest Federal laboratory. It was established by 
Congress in 1901 as the National Bureau of Standards, and subsequently 
renamed NIST.
  As a part of the Department of Commerce, NIST's mission is to promote 
economic growth by working with industry to develop and apply 
technology, measurements and standards. As the Nation's arbiter of 
standards, NIST enables our Nation's businesses to engage each other in 
commerce and participate in the global marketplace.
  The precise measurements required for establishing standards 
associated with today's increasingly complex technologies require 
NIST's laboratories to maintain the most sophisticated equipment and 
the most talented scientists in the world. To date, NIST has succeeded, 
and the science conducted by the Institute is a vital component of the 
Nation's civilian research and technology development base.
  H.R. 1274 authorizes $609 million for fiscal year 1998 and $628 
million for fiscal year 1999 for the Technology Administration. NIST's 
programs account for all but $7 million of that total in fiscal year 
1998.
  The care of NIST's functions are conducted by NIST's laboratories. 
The bill prioritizes these functions, increasing their funding by 5 
percent in fiscal year 1998 and 3 percent in fiscal year 1999. The 
increases will ensure that the laboratories have sufficient funding to 
maintain the high quality of their work, while expanding their services 
in three areas.
  First of all, the bill includes a $2.5 million increase in the 1998 
budget from the levels recommended by the administration for the 
physics program to support reengineering measurement services to 
simplify the delivery of measurement assurance at the point of use. 
This initiative should increase the accuracy and lower the cost of 
calibration for the end users of NIST standards.
  Second, H.R. 1274 authorizes an additional $4 million for fiscal year 
1998 for the Computer Science and Applied Mathematics Program to 
augment NIST work in the field of computer security. The increase is 
intended to enable NIST, through its programs, to improve computer 
security throughout the Federal Government.
  Third, the bill includes a half million dollar increase in fiscal 
year 1998 from the levels recommended by the administration for the 
Technical Assistance Program to support improving measurement standards 
to facilitate international trade and provide additional funding to 
implement the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995.
  H.R. 1274 also authorizes funding for NIST's most critical 
maintenance and construction needs. The bill includes $16.7 million in 
fiscal year 1998 and $67 million in fiscal year 1999 for construction 
and maintenance of NIST facilities.
  The funding is sufficient to cover the administration's request for 
maintenance in fiscal year 1998 and fiscal year 1999, and it includes 
$50 million in fiscal year 1999 for NIST's top new facility priority, 
the Advanced Metrology Laboratory. In order to ensure that the 
construction funding is used in the most appropriate fashion, H.R. 1274 
includes the certification requirement precluding the Department from 
obligating any money to new construction unless it meets the 
requirements of NIST's new facilities plan.
  In order to help offset these increase, the bill reduces funding for 
lower-priority programs at NIST, and in the Technology Administration.
  Therefore, the bill includes a reduction of $40 million and $75 
million to the Advanced Technology Program in fiscal years 1998 and 
1999, respectively. While I support the ATP program, I believe H.R. 
1274's authorizations of $185 million in fiscal year 1998 and $150 
million in fiscal year 1999 are sufficient for the program.
  H.R. 1274 also does not authorize funding for the $1.7 million 
Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Technology, called 
EPSCOT, and the $350,000 program in support of the administration's 
foreign policy.
  Along with funding NIST's laboratories, H.R. 1274 also authorizes 
full funding of all 75 existing Manufacturing Extension Partnership 
Centers and the administrative costs that are associated with running 
the program for the next 2 years.
  The bill also authorizes $4.1 million in fiscal year 1998 and $5.3 
million in fiscal year 1999 for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality 
Program. These totals will allow for the program's expansion into 
education and health care over the next 2 years.
  Finally, the bill contains a number of good Government provisions, 
including a sense of Congress on the year 2000 computer problem. As a 
strong proponent of addressing this impending crisis, I am pleased that 
this provision has not only been included in the NIST authorization 
bill, but all of the Committee on Science's authorizations.
  I am hopeful that with continued pressure from the Committee on 
Science and from Congress, the administration will fix the problem 
before it is too late.

                              {time}  1115

  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 1274 is both fiscally responsible and 
scientifically sound. It will help NIST remain the world's foremost 
scientific research institution for the establishment of standards and 
the development of new technologies.

[[Page H1806]]

  I encourage all my colleagues to join me in supporting the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology Authorization Act of 1997.
  Again, my appreciation to the chairman of the full committee, the 
gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. Sensenbrenner], and the ranking member, 
the gentleman from California [Mr. Brown], my ranking member, the 
gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Gordon] of the Subcommittee on Technology 
and the members.
  I also want to offer accolades to the staff who worked very hard on 
this inch by inch: on our side, Richard Russell and Ben Wu; on the 
minority side, Mike Quear and Jim Turner.
  Mr. GORDON. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Brown], ranking member on the Committee 
on Science.
  Mr. BROWN of California. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking minority 
member of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Gordon], 
for yielding me this time.
  I rise in support of H.R. 1274. I support most of the funding 
provisions, although I have a few reservations which the subcommittee 
ranking member has pointed out.
  Many of our concerns were resolved in the manager's amendment offered 
during the markup and the committee adopted an amendment, the Boehlert-
McHale amendment, which lifts the 6-year cap on Federal support for 
manufacturing extension partnership centers, which helps to assuage 
some of my problems with the bill.
  There are a few additional matters which we hope to continue to work 
with the majority on during the further progress of the bill. I am 
confident that I can safely urge my colleagues to support the bill.
  In conclusion, let me add a word about the legislative progress of 
this bill. Most of my colleagues will not recall, but we had some 
problems with this bill last year. I remember them very vividly because 
they represented a situation which I felt both the process and the 
results were wrong.
  I only make this statement, not to rehash the past, but to point out 
the marked difference in process and content this year and to praise 
the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. 
Sensenbrenner] for his spirit of cooperation with the minority, his 
evenhanded management of the committee, and for all of his other many 
good traits which I really never suspected until I saw him in action as 
chairman during the course of these last few months.
  It has been a pleasure to work with him. I look forward to continuing 
the cooperative relationship that we have had and to continue to 
produce the good work which I know our committee is capable of doing.
  Mr. COOK. Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to share my 
concerns about the Advanced Technology Program. First, let me say I am 
a strong believer in research and development. My own explosives 
manufacturing business stems from my father's research into ammonium 
nitrate. After considerable research and development of new, safe, low-
cost explosives, two successful companies were founded that to this day 
provide hundreds of jobs to people in Utah and other States.
  Research and development is the backbone of competitive enterprise. 
But I do not believe that the Advanced Technology Program is the best 
way to encourage corporate research and development. This program has 
some troubling flaws. I think it would be irresponsible to give $40 
million more to a program that has the problems ATP has.
  Let me give you an example of one problem. ATP is designed to fund 
long-term, high-risk programs that would not be funded by the private 
sector. To qualify, applicants must assure the Government that they 
could not get funding anywhere but from the ATP. They make that 
assurance in writing. Yet, a recent poll by the General Accounting 
Office of those who received ATP funding showed that fully half 
acknowledged they could have obtained funding somewhere else or would 
have gone ahead with their research without outside funding.
  That tells us the money isn't going to the projects ATP was designed 
to fund: Research projects that would never be done if it wasn't for 
ATP.
  That's a serious problem. Now, the Democrats want to toss another $40 
million of taxpayers' hard earned money into this program without 
correcting that flaw. President Clinton would like to go farther, 
throwing another $275 million into the ATP in the next 4 years, more 
than doubling the size of the program.
  Ladies and gentlemen, this is nothing more than corporate welfare. 
And not even very efficient corporate welfare, since apparently half of 
the companies that have received money from ATP could have gotten the 
money privately. That means tens of millions of taxpayer dollars--maybe 
hundreds of millions of dollars--that could have been spent to build 
roads and improve our schools, or reduce our Federal deficit was spent 
to assist companies that apparently didn't need governmental 
assistance. If we are serious about getting Federal spending under 
control, that thought should be deeply troubling to each of us.

  This amendment is the very thing American taxpayers are sick of. The 
lavish, reckless corporate welfare of this amendment is the kind of 
excess that appalls and angers our constituents. This program has 
already grown 2,150 percent in just 7 years. And now the Democrats want 
to fatten it even more. If President Clinton gets his way, by 2002, 
funding for the ATP will be 5,000 percent greater than it was in 1990. 
In 1990, Congress gave it $10 million. By 2002, President Clinton wants 
it to receive half a billion dollars. If that isn't an example of the 
runaway Federal program frightened Americans talk about, I don't know 
what is.
  What shocks me most is that this amendment would pour tens of 
millions more into it and President Clinton and the Democrats want to 
pour hundreds of millions more dollars into a program that has not, 
from 1990 to today, been able to spend all of the money it has been 
given. As a fiscal conservative, that stuns me. In 1990, ATP carried 
over $9.3 million of the $10 million it was given. Those carryovers 
have swollen year to year. Last year, ATP carried over $168 million. 
And now we want to give ATP $40 million more?
  Ladies and gentlemen, when some politicians tell me we can't balance 
our Federal budget, I want to point to programs like ATP.
  If we want to get our Federal spending under control, let's start 
here. If we have any regard at all for how hard our constituents work 
for their money, we can't throw $40 million more of their hard-won 
dollars away on this program. If we are serious about getting a bloated 
Federal budget under control, we will reject this amendment. Mr. 
Chairman, I yield back the remainder of my time.
  Mr. GORDON. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I have no further requests for time, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute printed in the bill shall be considered by sections as an 
original bill for the purpose of amendment. Pursuant to the rule, each 
section is considered as having been read.
  During consideration of the bill for amendment, the Chair may accord 
priority in recognition to a Member offering an amendment that he has 
preprinted in the designated place in the Congressional Record. Those 
amendments will be considered as having been read.
  The Clerk will designate section 1.
  The text of section 1 is as follows:
       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology Authorization Act of 1997''.

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to section 1?
  The Clerk will designate section 2.
  The text of section 2 is as follows:

     SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR SCIENTIFIC AND 
                   TECHNICAL RESEARCH AND SERVICES.

       (a) Laboratory Activities.--There are authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary of Commerce for the Scientific 
     and Technical Research and Services laboratory activities of 
     the National Institute of Standards and Technology--
       (1) $278,563,000 for fiscal year 1998, of which--
       (A) $38,104,000 shall be for Electronics and Electrical 
     Engineering;
       (B) $18,925,000 shall be for Manufacturing Engineering;
       (C) $31,791,000 shall be for Chemical Science and 
     Technology;
       (D) $30,372,000 shall be for Physics;
       (E) $50,914,000 shall be for Material Science and 
     Engineering;
       (F) $13,404,000 shall be for Building and Fire Research;
       (G) $47,073,000 shall be for Computer Science and Applied 
     Mathematics;
       (H) $19,376,000 shall be for Technical Assistance; and
       (I) $28,604,000 shall be for Research Support; and
       (2) $286,919,890 for fiscal year 1999, of which--
       (A) $39,247,120 shall be for Electronics and Electrical 
     Engineering;

[[Page H1807]]

       (B) $19,492,750 shall be for Manufacturing Engineering;
       (C) $32,744,730 shall be for Chemical Science and 
     Technology;
       (D) $31,283,160 shall be for Physics;
       (E) $52,441,420 shall be for Material Science and 
     Engineering;
       (F) $13,806,120 shall be for Building and Fire Research;
       (G) $48,485,190 shall be for Computer Science and Applied 
     Mathematics;
       (H) $19,957,280 shall be for Technical Assistance; and
       (I) $29,462,120 shall be for Research Support.
       (b) Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Program.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of Commerce 
     for the Malcolm Bladrige National Quality Program under 
     section 17 of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation 
     Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3711a)--
       (1) $4,134,500 for fiscal year 1998; and
       (2) $5,289,000 for fiscal year 1999.
       (c) Construction and Maintenance.--(1) There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary of Commerce for 
     construction and maintenance of facilities of the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology--
       (A) $16,692,000 for fiscal year 1998; and
       (B) $67,000,000 for fiscal year 1999.
       (2) None of the funds authorized by paragraph (1)(B) for 
     construction of facilities may be obligated unless the 
     Secretary of Commerce has certified to the Committee on 
     Science of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate that the 
     obligation of funds is consistent with a plan for meeting the 
     facilities needs of the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology that the Secretary has transmitted to those 
     committees.

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to section 2?
  The Clerk will designate section 3.
  The text of section 3 is as follows:

     SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE OFFICE OF THE 
                   UNDER SECRETARY FOR TECHNOLOGY.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of 
     Commerce for the activities of the Under Secretary for 
     Technology and the Office of Technology Policy--
       (1) $7,000,000 for fiscal year 1998; and
       (2) $7,205,000 for fiscal year 1999.

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to section 3?
  The Clerk will designate section 4.
  The text of section 4 is as follows:

     SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR INDUSTRY 
                   TECHNOLOGY SERVICES.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of 
     Commerce for the Industrial Technology Services activities of 
     the National Institute of Standards and Technology--
       (1) $302,900,000 for fiscal year 1998, of which--
       (A) $185,100,000 shall be for the Advanced Technology 
     Program under section 28 of the National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278n); and
       (B) $117,800,000 shall be for the Manufacturing Extension 
     Partnerships program under sections 25 and 26 of the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278k and 
     278l); and
       (2) $261,300,000 for fiscal year 1999, of which--
       (A) $150,000,000 shall be for the Advanced Technology 
     Program under section 28 of the National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278n); and
       (B) $111,300,000 shall be for the Manufacturing Extension 
     Partnerships program under section 5 and 26 of the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278k and 
     278l).

  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the 
remainder of the bill be printed in the Record, and open to amendment 
at any point.
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Wisconsin?
  There was no objection.
  The text of the remainder of the committee amendment in the nature of 
a substitute is as follows:

     SEC. 5. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY ACT 
                   AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Amendments.--Section 28 of the National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278n) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or contracts'' in subsection (b)(1)(B), 
     and inserting in lieu thereof ``contracts, and, subject to 
     the last sentence of this subsection, other transactions'';
       (2) by inserting ``and if the non-Federal participants in 
     the joint venture agree to pay at least 60 percent of the 
     total cost of the joint venture during the Federal 
     participation period under this section, which shall not 
     exceed 5 years,'' in subsection (b)(1)(B) after 
     ``participation to be appropriate,'';
       (3) by striking ``(ii) provision of a minority share of the 
     cost of such joint ventures for up to 5 years, and (iii)'' in 
     subsection (b)(1)(B), and inserting in lieu thereof ``and 
     (ii)'';
       (4) by striking ``and cooperative agreements'' in 
     subsection (b)(2), and inserting in lieu thereof ``, 
     cooperative agreements, and, subject to the last sentence of 
     this subsection, other transactions'';
       (5) by striking ``, provided that emphasis is'' in 
     subsection (b)(2) and inserting in lieu thereof ``on the 
     condition that grant recipients (other than small businesses 
     within the meaning of the Small Business Act) provide at 
     least 60 percent of the costs of the project, with 
     emphasis'';
       (6) by adding after subsection (b)(4) the following:

     ``The authority under paragraph (1)(B) and paragraph (2) to 
     enter into other transactions shall apply only if the 
     Secretary, acting through the Director, determines that 
     standard contracts, grants, or cooperative agreements are not 
     feasible or appropriate, and only when other transaction 
     instruments incorporate terms and conditions that reflect the 
     use of generally accepted commercial accounting and auditing 
     practices.'';
       (7) in subsection (d)(1), by inserting ``and be of a nature 
     and scope that would not be pursued in a timely manner 
     without Federal assistance'' after ``technical merit''; and
       (8) by adding at the end the following new subsections:
       ``(k) Nothwithstanding subsection (b)(1)(B) and subsection 
     (d)(3), the Director may grant extensions beyond the 
     deadlines established under those provisions for joint 
     venture and single applicant awardees to expend Federal funds 
     to complete their projects, if such extension may be granted 
     with no additional cost to the Federal Government and it is 
     in the Federal Government's interest to do so.
       ``(l) The Secretary, acting through the Director, may vest 
     title to tangible personal property in any recipient of 
     financial assistance under this section if--
       ``(1) the property is purchased with funds provided under 
     this section; and
       ``(2) the Secretary, acting through the Director, 
     determines that the vesting of such property furthers the 
     objectives of the Institute.

     Vesting under this subsection shall be subject to such 
     limitations as are prescribed by the Secretary, acting 
     through the Director, and shall be made without further 
     obligation to the United States Government.''.
       (b) Additional Amendments.--(1) Section 28 of the National 
     Institute of Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278n) is 
     further amended by striking the period at the end of the 
     first sentence of subsection (d)(11)(A) and inserting in lieu 
     thereof the following: ``or any other participant in a joint 
     venture receiving financial assistance under this section, as 
     agreed by the parties, notwithstanding the requirements of 
     section 202 (a) and (b) of title 35, United States Code.''.
       (2) The amendment made by this subsection shall be 
     effective only with respect to assistance for which 
     solicitations for proposals are made after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 6. MANUFACTURING EXTENSION PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM CENTER 
                   EXTENSION.

       Section 25(c)(5) of the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 278k(c)(5)) is amended by striking 
     ``, which are designed'' and all that follows through 
     ``operation of a Center.'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``. 
     After the sixth year, a Center may receive additional 
     financial support under this section if it has received a 
     positive evaluation through an independent review, under 
     procedures established by the Institute. Such an independent 
     review shall be required at least every two years after the 
     sixth year of operation. Funding received for a fiscal year 
     under this section after the sixth year of operation shall 
     not exceed the proportion of the capital and annual operating 
     and maintenance costs of the Center received by the Center 
     during its sixth year of operation.''.

     SEC. 7. MALCOLM BALDRIGE QUALITY AWARD.

       Section 17(c)(3) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology 
     Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3711a(c)(3)) is amended by 
     inserting ``, unless the Secretary determines that a third 
     award is merited and can be given at no addition cost to the 
     Federal Government'' after ``in any year''.

     SEC. 8. NEXT GENERATION INTERNET.

       None of the funds authorized by this Act, or any other Act 
     enacted before the date of the enactment of this Act, may be 
     used for the Next Generation Internet. Notwithstanding the 
     previous sentence, funds may be used for the continuation of 
     programs and activities that were funded and carried out 
     during fiscal year 1997.

     SEC. 9. LIMITATIONS.

       (a) Prohibition of Lobbying Activities.--None of the funds 
     authorized by this Act shall be available for any activity 
     whose purpose is to influence legislation pending before the 
     Congress, except that this subsection shall not prevent 
     officers or employees of the United States or of its 
     departments or agencies from communicating to Members of 
     Congress on the request of any Member or to Congress, through 
     the proper channels, requests for legislation or 
     appropriations which they deem necessary for the efficient 
     conduct of the public business.
       (b) Limitation on Appropriations.--No sums are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Director of the National Institute 
     of Standards and Technology for fiscal years 1998 and 1999 
     for the activities for which sums are authorized by this Act, 
     unless such sums are specifically authorized to be 
     appropriated by this Act.
       (c) Eligibility for Awards.--
       (1) In general.--The Director of the National Institute of 
     Standards and Technology shall exclude from consideration for 
     grant agreements made by the Institute after fiscal year 1997 
     any person who received funds, other than those described in 
     paragraph (2), appropriated for a fiscal year after fiscal 
     year 1997, under a grant agreement from any Federal funding 
     source for a project that was not subjected to a competitive, 
     merit-based award process. Any exclusion from consideration 
     pursuant to this subsection shall be effective for a period 
     of 5 years after the person receives such Federal funds.
       (2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to the 
     receipt of Federal funds by a person due to the membership of 
     that person in a class specified by law for which assistance 
     is awarded to members of the class according to a formula 
     provided by law.
       (3) Definition.--For purposes of this subsection, the term 
     ``grant agreement'' means a

[[Page H1808]]

     legal instrument whose principal purpose is to transfer a 
     thing of value to the recipient to carry out a public purpose 
     of support or stimulation authorized by a law of the United 
     States, and does not include the acquisition (by purchase, 
     lease, or barter) of property or services for the direct 
     benefit or use of the United States Government. Such term 
     does not include cooperative agreement (as such term is used 
     in section 6305 of title 31, United States Code) or a 
     cooperative research and development agreement (as such term 
     is defined in section 12(d)(1) of the Stevenson-Wydler 
     Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3710a(d)(1))).

     SEC. 10. NOTICE.

       (a) Notice of Reprogramming.--If any funds authorized by 
     this Act are subject to a reprogramming action that requires 
     notice to be provided to the Appropriations Committees of the 
     House of Representatives and the Senate, notice of such 
     action shall concurrently be provided to the Committee on 
     Science of the House of Representatives and the Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate.
       (b) Notice of Reorganization.--The Secretary of Commerce 
     shall provide notice to the Committees on Science and 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives, and the 
     Committees on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and 
     Appropriations of the Senate, not later than 15 days before 
     any major reorganization of any program, project, or activity 
     of the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

     SEC. 11. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE YEAR 2000 PROBLEM.

       With the year 2000 fast approaching, it is the sense of 
     Congress that the National Institute of Standards and 
     Technology should--
       (1) give high priority to correcting all 2-digit date-
     related problems in its computer systems to ensure that those 
     systems continue to operate effectively in the year 2000 and 
     beyond;
       (2) assess immediately the extent of the risk to the 
     operations of the Institute posed by the problems referred to 
     in paragraph (1), and plan and budget for achieving Year 2000 
     compliance for all of its mission-critical systems; and
       (3) develop contingency plans for those systems that the 
     Institute is unable to correct in time.

     SEC. 12. BUY AMERICAN.

       (a) Compliance With Buy American Act.--No funds 
     appropriated pursuant to this Act may be expended by an 
     entity unless the entity agrees that in expending the 
     assistance the entity will comply with sections 2 through 4 
     of the Act of March 3, 1933 (41 U.S.C. 10a-10c, popularly 
     known as the ``Buy American Act'').
       (b) Sense of Congress.--In the case of any equipment or 
     products that may be authorized to be purchased with 
     financial assistance provided under this Act, it is the sense 
     of Congress that entities receiving such assistance should, 
     in expending the assistance, purchase only American-made 
     equipment and products.
       (c) Notice to Recipients of Assistance.--In providing 
     financial assistance under this Act, the Secretary of 
     Commerce shall provide to each recipient of the assistance a 
     notice describing the statement made in subsection (a) by the 
     Congress.

  The CHAIRMAN. Are there any amendments to the bill?
  If not, the question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute.
  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly the Committee rose, and the Speaker pro tempore [Mr. 
Dreier] having assumed the chair, Mr. Duncan, Chairman of the Committee 
of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that that 
Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1274) to 
authorize appropriations for the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and for other purposes, 
pursuant to House Resolution 127, he reported the bill back to the 
House with an amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  The question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute.
  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read 
the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the 
table.

                          ____________________