[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 156 (2010), Part 11]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 15860-15861]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  FINDINGS OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 
                        PURSUANT TO H. RES. 1493

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. BART GORDON

                              of tennessee

                    in the house of representatives

                     Wednesday, September 15, 2010

  Mr. GORDON of Tennessee. Madam Speaker, I am submitting, pursuant to 
House Resolution 1493, changes in law that could help achieve deficit 
reduction by reducing waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement; promoting 
efficiency and reform of government; and controlling spending within 
Government programs for which the Committee on Science and Technology 
has primary authorizing authority. The specific measures listed below 
are pending before Congress. If enacted, these measures would reduce 
government waste, promote efficiency, and help to control spending 
within Government programs.


                    Coordination and Non-Duplication

  One of the recurring legislative themes for the Science and 
Technology Committee during the 111th Congress has been coordination 
and non-duplication. In tough budgetary times, it is vital that 
precious Federal research dollars not be spent on duplicative programs. 
Unfortunately, the coordinating activities necessary to prevent 
duplicative research efforts have been surprisingly lacking both across 
the Federal government and within individual agencies. To ensure that 
Federal research expenditures are most effective, the Committee 
included coordination requirements in several bills this Congress.
  The first example of this theme was the House passage of the National 
Nanotechnology Initiative Amendments Act of 2009 (H.R. 554) on February 
11, 2009. The National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI) is an effort to 
coordinate over 1.7 billion dollars in annual Federal nanotechnology 
research expenditures across 15 separate agencies. The 2009 bill is an 
update to the existing program which should strengthen the interagency 
coordination and oversight functions of NNI.
  Interagency coordination was also the driving premise behind H.R. 
1145, the National Water Research and Development Initiative Act of 
2009, which passed the House on April 23, 2009. The purpose of this 
bill is to create a Federal initiative to coordinate the Government's 
efforts in research and development related to water resources. This is 
another field of inquiry in which multiple Federal agencies are 
involved, but where little effort has been expended to date to 
determine if these efforts are complementary or duplicative. H.R. 1145 
would remedy this by bringing each of these agencies together, along 
with the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), to develop a 
National Water Research and Assessment Plan to coordinate water 
research across the Federal Government.
  The Committee's efforts to coordinate Federal Government activities 
also extended to the field of Science, Technology, Engineering, and 
Math (STEM) education in H.R. 1709, the STEM Education Coordination Act 
of 2009, which passed the House on June 8, 2009. The purpose of H.R. 
1709 is to establish a committee through the National Science and 
Technology Council with OSTP, to coordinate Federal programs and 
activities in support of STEM education across the Federal Government. 
The coordinating committee would also be charged with developing and 
periodically updating a strategic plan for STEM education to craft a 
more cohesive and effective Federal effort toward STEM education.
  In H.R. 2020, the Networking and Information Technology Research and 
Development Act of 2009, the Committee updated the successful 
Networking and Information Technology Research and Development (NITRD) 
program to codify and emphasize the National Coordination Office to 
ensure coordination of the computing and information technology 
research of the 13 Federal agencies performing this type of work. The 
bill would also require the formulation of a strategic plan to set a 
coordinated direction for Federal information technology research. 
Additionally, the bill emphasizes communication with outside 
communities of interest in an effort to help ensure that Federal 
research investments in these areas compliment, rather than duplicate, 
private-sector investments in these areas.
  The Committee also established an Interagency Coordinating Committee 
in its reauthorization of the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction 
Program and the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program in H.R. 
3820, the Natural Hazards Risk Reduction Act of 2010. The purpose of 
the committee is to ensure a coordinated approach in Federal research 
related to the earthquake and wind programs authorized in H.R. 3820. 
H.R. 3820 passed the House on March 2, 2010.
  Finally, the Committee broadly addressed the issue of coordination of 
Federal efforts in the areas of research and development and STEM 
education in H.R. 5116, the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 
2010, which passed the House on May 28, 2010. In addition to containing 
identical provisions as H.R. 554, H.R. 1709, and H.R. 2020, the 
COMPETES Act contained additional provisions dealing with coordination 
and non duplication. Under Title VI of the bill, the Undersecretary for 
Science at the Department of Energy was given additional authority to 
coordinate energy technology research, development, and demonstration 
activities across the

[[Page 15861]]

Department. There are also coordination provisions relating to the 
management of federal scientific collections and manufacturing research 
and development.


                        NASA Acquisition Reform

  Over the course of the past several years, the Committee on Science 
and Technology has investigated deficiencies in the awarding of major 
NASA contracts, with a focus on the flawed awarding of the Space 
Communications Networks Services Contract. This contract award, worth 
1.3 billion dollars, has been successfully protested to the Government 
Accountability Office twice, and significant concerns regarding NASA's 
contract award management have been raised by these protests. To 
address these issues, the Committee devoted Title VIII of its 2010 NASA 
authorization (H.R. 5781) to acquisition management. Notably, this 
title attempts to avoid organizational conflicts of interest in major 
NASA acquisitions by prohibiting contractors providing systems 
engineering or technical assistance to NASA from competing for the 
underlying management or acquisition contract. Similar provisions 
applicable to the Department of Defense were included in the Weapon 
Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009. In an effort to control 
spiraling acquisition costs, Title VIII of H.R. 5781 also strengthens a 
prohibition on expenditure of funds for acquisitions which exceed a 30 
percent cost growth.


             Manufacturing Extension Partnership Management

  As a component of the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010, 
the Committee included a provision requiring the Director of the 
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to conduct an 
assessment of the governance of the Manufacturing Extension Partnership 
(MEP) program. In carrying out the assessment, the Director is 
instructed to use criteria established pursuant to the Malcolm Baldrige 
National Quality Award. This novel approach is intended to require the 
director of NIST to use criteria generally applied in making 
assessments of private sector proposals on NIST's own programs. It is 
hoped that this critical assessment will lead to better management of 
the MEP program.


                         Future areas of focus

  The Committee on Science and Technology continues to look at ways of 
making the Federal scientific agencies more efficient and better 
managed. One area of future focus is the management of the Department 
of Energy's (DOE) civilian research laboratories. DOE's laboratories 
are currently regulated internally, and, to a large degree, to a single 
DOE set of standards. However, the safety, environmental, and security 
requirements of DOE's civilian and military laboratories vary greatly. 
The Committee has begun to investigate whether turning DOE's civilian 
laboratories over to non-DOE regulation would prove more cost effective 
than its current internal management structure. The Committee has also 
been looking at recommendations from a 2009 report by the National 
Academy of Public Administration to determine if DOE could implement 
practices aimed at better management of its human capital.
  I hope these examples of the Committee's legislative work prove 
helpful to the Congress at large. As the Congress moves forward with 
future efforts toward deficit reduction and enhanced management of the 
Federal Government, the Committee on Science and Technology will 
continue to be an enthusiastic partner in these endeavors.

                          ____________________