[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 91 (Tuesday, May 25, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3440-S3441]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

  SA 1994. Mr. PAUL (for himself, Mr. Coons, and Mr. Tillis) submitted 
an amendment intended to be proposed to amendment SA 1502 proposed by 
Mr. Schumer to the bill S. 1260, to establish a new Directorate for 
Technology and Innovation in the National Science Foundation, to 
establish a regional technology hub program, to require a strategy and 
report on economic security, science, research, innovation, 
manufacturing, and job creation, to establish a critical supply chain 
resiliency program, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on 
the table; as follows:

        Beginning on page 478, strike line 17, and all that 
     follows through page 485, line 18, and insert the following:

     SEC. 2527. BASIC RESEARCH.

       (a) Nondisclosure of Members of Grant Review Panel.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of law, each agency that 
     awards a Federal research grant shall not disclose, either 
     publicly or privately, to an applicant for such grant the 
     identity of any member of the grant review panel for such 
     applicant.
       (b) Public Accessibility of Research Funded by Taxpayers.--
       (1) Definition of federal agency.--In this section, the 
     term ``Federal agency'' means an Executive agency, as defined 
     under section 105 of title 5, United States Code.
       (2) Federal research public access policy.--
       (A) Requirement to develop policy.--
       (i) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this section, each Federal agency with annual 
     extramural research expenditures of over $100,000,000 shall 
     have an agency research public access policy that is 
     consistent with and advances the goals of the Federal agency.
       (ii) Common procedures.--Where appropriate, Federal 
     agencies required to develop a policy under clause (i) shall 
     follow common procedures for ensuring access to research 
     papers to minimize compliance burdens and costs and avoid 
     unnecessary duplication of existing mechanisms.
       (B) Content.--Each Federal research public access policy 
     shall provide for--
       (i) submission to a digital repository or access through a 
     system that achieves the goals of this section designated or 
     maintained by the Federal agency of an electronic version of 
     the accepted manuscript of original research papers that have 
     been accepted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and 
     that result from research supported, in whole or in part, 
     from funding by the Federal Government;
       (ii) the incorporation of any changes resulting from the 
     peer review process in the accepted manuscript described 
     under clause (i);
       (iii) the replacement of the accepted manuscript with the 
     final published version if--

       (I) the publisher consents to the replacement; and
       (II) the goals of the Federal agency for functionality and 
     interoperability are retained; and

       (iv) free online public access to such accepted manuscripts 
     or final published versions within a time period that is 
     appropriate for each type of research conducted or sponsored 
     by the Federal agency, not later than 12 months after the 
     official date of publication in peer-reviewed journals.
       (C) Application of policy.--Each Federal research public 
     access policy shall--
       (i) apply to--

       (I) researchers employed by the Federal agency whose works 
     remain in the public domain; and
       (II) researchers funded by the Federal agency; and

       (ii) provide that works described under clause (i)(I) shall 
     be--

       (I) marked as being public domain material when published; 
     and
       (II) made available at the same time such works are made 
     available under subparagraph (B)(iv).

       (D) Exclusions.--Each Federal research public access policy 
     shall not apply to--
       (i) research progress reports presented at professional 
     meetings or conferences;
       (ii) laboratory notes, preliminary data analyses, notes of 
     the author, phone logs, or other information used to produce 
     accepted manuscripts;
       (iii) classified research, research resulting in works that 
     generate revenue or royalties for authors (such as books) or 
     patentable discoveries, to the extent necessary to protect a 
     copyright or patent; or
       (iv) authors who do not submit their work to a journal or 
     works that are rejected by journals.
       (3) Rule of construction regarding patent or copyright 
     law.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit any 
     exclusive right under the provisions of title 17 or 35, 
     United States Code.
       (4) GAO report.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of this section, and every 5 years thereafter, the 
     Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to 
     Congress a report that--
       (A) includes an analysis of the period between the date on 
     which articles generally become publicly available in a 
     journal and the date on which the accepted manuscript is in 
     the online repository of the applicable Federal agency;
       (B) examines the effectiveness of the Federal research 
     public access policy in providing the public with free online 
     access to papers on research funded by each Federal agency 
     required to develop a policy under paragraph (2)(A); and
       (C) examines the impact of the Federal research public 
     access policy on the availability, quality, integrity, and 
     sustainability of scholarly communication and on the degree 
     to which policies avoid unnecessary duplication of existing 
     mechanisms.
       (5) Downstream reporting.--Any person or institution 
     awarded a grant from a Federal research agency shall--
       (A) notify and seek authorization from the relevant agency 
     for any funds derived from the grant made available through a 
     subgrant or subsequent grant (including to an employee or 
     subdivision of the grant recipient's organization); and
       (B) ensure that each subgrant or subsequent grant award 
     (including to an employee or subdivision of the grant 
     recipient's organization) funded with funds derived from the 
     Federal grant is within the scope of the Federal grant award.
       (6) Impartiality in funding scientific research.--
     Notwithstanding any other provision of law, each Federal 
     agency, in awarding grants for scientific research, shall be 
     impartial and shall not seek to advance any political 
     position or fund a grant to reach a predetermined conclusion.

     SEC. 2528. GAO STUDY ON OVERSIGHT OF FEDERAL SCIENCE AND 
                   TECHNOLOGY GRANT MAKING AND INVESTMENTS.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) in instances such as the Troubled Asset Relief Program, 
     the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Iraq, and 
     Afghanistan, Congress has created special inspectors general 
     and other oversight entities focused on particular program 
     areas who have performed in outstanding ways;
       (2) the oversight entities described in paragraph (1) have 
     helped to strengthen oversight

[[Page S3441]]

     in cross-agency activities and where component inspectors 
     general may have otherwise faced significant challenges;
       (3) because of the cross-agency nature of Federal science 
     and technology activities, Congress created the Office of 
     Science and Technology Policy to coordinate and harmonize 
     among science functions at agencies;
       (4) the United States innovation ecosystem, which uses 
     multiple science agencies to invest in research and 
     development, can make it more difficult to identify and 
     remove scientists who violate research integrity principles;
       (5) the single agency jurisdiction of an agency inspector 
     general can be a disadvantage with respect to their oversight 
     roles, and opportunities to strengthen the system may exist;
       (6) single agency jurisdiction of inspectors general may 
     also make it difficult to harmonize principles and standards 
     for oversight of waste, fraud, and abuse among agencies; and
       (7) certain issues of fraud, waste, and abuse in Federal 
     science and technology activities span multiple agencies and 
     are more apparent through cross-agency oversight.
       (b) Study.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall conduct a study and submit to Congress a report 
     that--
       (1) evaluates the frequency of cases of waste, fraud, or 
     abuse perpetrated across multiple Federal science agencies by 
     an awardee or group of awardees;
       (2) evaluates the effectiveness of existing mechanisms to 
     detect waste, fraud, and abuse perpetrated across multiple 
     Federal science agencies by an awardee or group of awardees; 
     and
       (3) evaluates options for strengthening detection of waste, 
     fraud, and abuse perpetrated across multiple Federal science 
     agencies by an awardee or group of awardees, including by 
     examining the benefits and drawbacks of--
       (A) providing additional support to agency inspectors 
     general with regard to coordinated oversight of Federal and 
     technology grant making investments; and
       (B) alternative mechanisms for strengthening prevention and 
     detection of waste, fraud, and abuse across Federal science 
     agencies perpetrated across multiple Federal science agencies 
     by an awardee or group of awardees, such as the establishment 
     of a special inspector general or other mechanisms as the 
     Comptroller General sees fit.
                                 ______