|
Public Law
Title: National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2020
Number: 116- 92
Session:
116th Congress (First Session)
The following are excerpts, highlighted in red, from the
final legislation and/or conference report which contain
references to and studies for The National Academies of
Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (Pound signs [##]
between passages denote the deletion of unrelated text.)
S1790 Inhofe (R-Okla.) 12/17/19
Enrolled (finally passed both houses)
To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2020 for
military activities of the Department of Defense, for
military construction, and for defense activities of the
Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel
strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
######
SEC. 262. NATIONAL STUDY ON DEFENSE RESEARCH AT
HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES AND
OTHER MINORITY INSTITUTIONS.
(a) Study
Required.
—The Secretary of Defense shall seek to enter into
an agreement with the National Academies of
Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (referred to in
this section as the “National Academies”) under
which the National Academies will conduct a study on
the status of defense research at covered
institutions and the methods and means necessary to
advance research capacity at covered institutions to
comprehensively address the national security and
defense needs of the United States.
(b) Designation.—The study conducted under
subsection (a) shall be known as the “National Study
on Defense Research At Historically Black Colleges
and Universities and Other Minority
Institutions”.
(c) Elements.—The study conducted under subsection
(a) shall include an examination of each of the
following:
(1) The degree to which covered institutions are
successful in competing for and executing Department
of Defense contracts and grants for defense
research.
(2) Best practices for advancing the capacity of
covered institutions to compete for and conduct
research programs related to national security and
defense.
(3) The advancements and investments necessary to
elevate covered institutions to R2 status or R1
status on the Carnegie Classification of
Institutions of Higher Education, consistent with
the criteria of the classification system.
(4) The facilities and infrastructure for
defense-related research at covered institutions as
compared to the facilities and infrastructure at
institutions classified as R1 status on the Carnegie
Classification of Institutions of Higher
Education.
(5) Incentives to attract, recruit, and retain
leading research faculty to covered
institutions.
(6) Best practices of institutions classified as R1
status on the Carnegie Classification of
Institutions of Higher Education, including best
practices with respect to—
(A) the establishment of a distinct legal entity
to—
(i) enter into contracts or receive grants from the
Department;
(ii) lay the groundwork for future research
opportunities;
(iii) develop research proposals;
(iv) engage with defense research funding
organizations; and
(v) execute the administration of grants; and
(B) determining the type of legal entity, if any,
to establish for the purposes described in
subparagraph (A).
(7) The ability of covered institutions to develop,
protect, and commercialize intellectual property
created through defense-related research.
(8) The total amount of defense research funding
awarded to all institutions of higher education,
including covered institutions, through contracts
and grants for each of fiscal years 2010 through
2019 and, with respect to each such
institution—
(A) whether the institution established a distinct
legal entity to enter into contracts or receive
grants from the Department and, if so, the type of
legal entity that was established;
(B) the total value of contracts and grants awarded
to the institution of higher education for each of
fiscal years 2010 through 2019;
(C) the overhead rate of the institution of higher
education for fiscal year 2019;
(D) the institution’s classification on the
Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher
Education; and
(E) whether the institution qualifies as a covered
institution.
(9) Recommendations for strengthening and enhancing
the programs executed under section 2362 of title
10, United States Code.
(10) Recommendations to enhance the capacity of
covered institutions to transition research products
into defense acquisition programs or
commercialization.
(11) Previous executive or legislative actions by
the Federal Government to address imbalances in
Federal research funding, including such programs as
the Defense Established Program to Stimulate
Competitive Research (commonly known as
“DEPSCoR”).
(12) The effectiveness of the Department in
attracting and retaining students specializing in
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
fields from covered institutions for the
Department’s programs on emerging capabilities and
technologies.
(13) Recommendations for the development of
incentives to encourage research and educational
collaborations between covered institutions and
other institutions of higher education.
(14) Any other matters the Secretary of Defense
determines to be relevant to advancing the defense
research capacity of covered institutions.
(d) Reports.—
(1) INITIAL REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary
of Defense shall submit to the President and the
appropriate congressional committees an initial
report that includes—
(A) the findings of the study conducted under
subsection (a); and
(B) any recommendations that the National Academies
may have for action by the executive branch and
Congress to improve the participation of covered
institutions in Department of Defense research and
any actions that may be carried out to expand the
research capacity of such institutions.
(2) FINAL REPORT.—Not later than December 31, 2021,
the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
President and the appropriate congressional
committees a comprehensive report on the results of
the study required under subsection (a).
(3) FORM OF REPORTS.—Each report submitted under
this subsection shall be made publicly
available.
(e) Implementation Required.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), not
later than March 1, 2022, the Secretary of Defense shall
commence implementation of each recommendation included
in the final report submitted under subsection (d)(2).
(2) EXCEPTIONS.—
(A) DELAYED IMPLEMENTATION.—The Secretary of Defense may
commence implementation of a recommendation described
paragraph (1) later than March 1, 2022, if—
(i) the Secretary submits to the congressional defense
committees written notice of the intent of the Secretary
to delay implementation of the recommendation; and
(ii) includes, as part of such notice, a specific
justification for the delay in implementing the
recommendation.
(B) NONIMPLEMENTATION.—The Secretary of Defense may
elect not to implement a recommendation described in
paragraph (1), if—
(i) the Secretary submits to the congressional defense
committees written notice of the intent of the Secretary
not to implement the recommendation; and
(ii) includes, as part of such notice—
(I) the reasons for the Secretary’s decision not to
implement the recommendation; and
(II) a summary of alternative actions the Secretary will
carry out to address the purposes underlying the
recommendation.
(3) IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.—For each recommendation that
the Secretary implements under this subsection, the
Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense
committees an implementation plan that includes—
(A) a summary of actions that have been, or will be,
carried out to implement the recommendation; and
(B) a schedule, with specific milestones, for completing
the implementation of the recommendation.
(f) List of Covered Institutions.—The Secretary of
Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of
Education and the Presidents of the National
Academies, shall make available a list identifying
each covered institution examined as part of the
study under subsection (a). The list shall be made
available on a publicly accessible website and shall
be updated not less frequently than once annually
until the date on which the final report is
submitted under subsection (d)(2).
(g) Definitions.—In this section:
(1) The term “appropriate congressional committees”
means—
(A) the congressional defense committees;
(B) the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions of the Senate; and
(C) the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of
Representatives.
(2) The term “covered institution” means—
(A) a part B institution (as that term is defined in
section 322(2) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1061(2)); or
(B) any other institution of higher education (as that
term is defined in section 101 of such Act (20 U.S.C.
1001)) at which not less than 50 percent of the total
student enrollment consists of students from ethnic
groups that are underrepresented in the fields of
science and engineering.
######
SEC. 1674. INDEPENDENT STUDY ON RISKS OF NUCLEAR
TERRORISM AND NUCLEAR WAR.
(a) In General.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall enter into an agreement with the National
Academy of Sciences to conduct a study on—
(1) whether a risk assessment framework is
applicable to determining the potential risks of
nuclear terrorism and nuclear war; and
(2) the implications for national security of
assumptions in nuclear policy and doctrine.
(b) Matters Included.—The study under subsection
(a) shall—
(1) identify risks described in paragraph (1) of
that subsection;
(2) assess prior literature on such risks;
(3) assess the role that quantitative and
nonquantitative analytical methods can play in
assessing such risks, including the limitations of
such analysis;
(4) identify and examine the assumptions about
nuclear risks that underlie the national security
strategy of the United States; and
(5) describe the consequences of the methods and
assumptions that have been, are, or could be used in
developing the nuclear security strategy of the
United States.
(c) Recommendations.—Based on findings under
subsection (b), the study may provide
recommendations with respect to improving the use of
a risk assessment framework described in subsection
(a)(1).
(d) Submission.—Not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall submit to the congressional defense committees
the study under subsection (a), without
change.
(e) Form.—The study shall be submitted in
unclassified form, but may include a classified
annex.
######
SEC. 1746. SECURING AMERICAN SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY.
(a) Interagency Working Group.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Director of the Office of Science
and Technology Policy, acting through the National
Science and Technology Council, in consultation with the
National Security Advisor, shall establish or designate
an interagency working group to coordinate activities to
protect federally funded research and development from
foreign interference, cyber attacks, theft, or espionage
and to develop common definitions and best practices for
Federal science agencies and grantees, while accounting
for the importance of the open exchange of ideas and
international talent required for scientific progress
and American leadership in science and technology.
(2) MEMBERSHIP.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—The working group shall include at least
one representative of—
(i) the National Science Foundation;
(ii) the Department of Energy;
(iii) the National Aeronautics and Space Administration;
(iv) the Department of Commerce;
(v) the Department of Health and Human Services;
(vi) the Department of Defense;
(vii) the Department of Agriculture;
(viii) the Department of Education;
(ix) the Department of State;
(x) the Department of the Treasury;
(xi) the Department of Justice;
(xii) the Department of Homeland Security;
(xiii) the Central Intelligence Agency;
(xiv) the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence;
(xv) the Office of Management and Budget;
(xvi) the National Economic Council; and
(xvii) such other Federal department or agency as the
President considers appropriate.
(B) CHAIR.—The working group shall be chaired by the
Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy
(or the Director’s designee).
(3) RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE WORKING GROUP.—The working
group established under paragraph (1) shall—
(A) identify known and potential cyber, physical, and
human intelligence threats and vulnerabilities within
the United States scientific and technological
enterprise;
(B) coordinate efforts among agencies to share and
update important information, including specific
examples of foreign interference, cyber attacks, theft,
or espionage directed at federally funded research and
development or the integrity of the United States
scientific enterprise;
(C) identify and assess existing mechanisms for
protection of federally funded research and development;
(D) develop an inventory of—
(i) terms and definitions used across Federal science
agencies to delineate areas that may require additional
protection; and
(ii) policies and procedures at Federal science agencies
regarding protection of federally funded research; and
(E) develop and periodically update unclassified
recommendations for policy guidance to assist Federal
science agencies and grantees in defending against
threats to federally funded research and development and
the integrity of the United States scientific enterprise
that—
(i) includes—
(I) descriptions of known and potential threats to
federally funded research and development and the
integrity of the United States scientific enterprise;
(II) common definitions and terminology for
categorization of research and technologies that are
protected;
(III) identified areas of research or technology that
might require additional protection;
(IV) recommendations for how control mechanisms can be
utilized to protect federally funded research and
development from foreign interference, cyber attacks,
theft or espionage, including any recommendations for
updates to existing control mechanisms;
(V) recommendations for best practices for Federal
science agencies, universities, and grantees to defend
against threats to federally funded research and
development, including coordination and harmonization of
any relevant reporting requirements that Federal science
agencies implement for grantees, and by providing such
best practices with grantees and universities at the
time of awarding such grants or entering into research
contracts;
(VI) a remediation plan for grantees and universities to
mitigate the risks regarding such threats before
research grants or contracts are cancelled because of
such threats;
(VII) recommendations for providing opportunities and
facilities for academic researchers to perform
controlled and classified research in support of Federal
missions;
(VIII) assessments of potential consequences that any
proposed practices would have on international
collaboration and United States leadership in science
and technology; and
(IX) a classified addendum as necessary to further
inform Federal science agency decisionmaking; and
(ii) accounts for the range of needs across different
sectors of the United States science and technology
enterprise.
(4) POLICY GUIDANCE.—Not later than 270 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the
Office of Science and Technology Policy, in consultation
with the working group established under paragraph (1),
shall—
(A) develop and issue policy guidance to Federal science
agencies with more than $100,000,000 in extramural
research in fiscal year 2018 to protect against threats
to federally funded research and the United States
science enterprise, including foreign interference,
cyber attacks, theft, or espionage; and
(B) encourage consistency in the policies developed by
Federal science agencies with more than $100,000,000 in
extramural research in fiscal year 2018, as appropriate,
and factoring in the potential range of applications
across different areas of science and technology.
(5) COORDINATION WITH NATIONAL ACADEMIES
ROUNDTABLE.—The Director of the Office of Science
and Technology Policy shall coordinate with the
Academies to ensure that at least one member of the
interagency working group is also a member of the
roundtable under subsection (b).
(6) INTERIM REPORT.—Not later than six months after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the
Office of Science and Technology Policy shall provide a
report to the relevant committees that includes the
inventory required under paragraph (3)(D), and an update
on progress toward developing the policy guidance
required under paragraphs (3)(E) and (4), as well as any
additional activities undertaken by the working group in
that time.
(7) BIENNIAL REPORTING.—Two years after the date of
enactment of this Act, and at least every two years
thereafter, the Director of the Office of Science and
Technology Policy shall provide a summary report to the
relevant committees on the activities of the working
group and the most current version of the policy
guidance required under paragraph (4).
(8) TERMINATION.—The working group established or
designated under paragraph (1) shall terminate on the
date that is ten years after the date on which such
working group is established or designated.
(b) National Academies Science, Technology and
Security Roundtable.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The National Science Foundation,
the Department of Energy, and the Department of
Defense, and any other agencies as determined by the
Director of the Office of Science and Technology
Policy, shall enter into a joint agreement with the
Academies to create a new “National Science,
Technology, and Security Roundtable” (hereinafter in
this subsection referred to as the
“roundtable”).
(2) PARTICIPANTS.—The roundtable shall include
senior representatives and practitioners from
Federal science, intelligence, and national security
agencies, law enforcement, as well as key
stakeholders in the United States scientific
enterprise including institutions of higher
education, Federal research laboratories, industry,
and non-profit research organizations.
(3) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the roundtable is to
facilitate among participants—
(A) exploration of critical issues related to
protecting United States national and economic
security while ensuring the open exchange of ideas
and international talent required for scientific
progress and American leadership in science and
technology;
(B) identification and consideration of security
threats and risks involving federally funded
research and development, including foreign
interference, cyber attacks, theft, or
espionage;
(C) identification of effective approaches for
communicating the threats and risks identified in
subparagraph (b) to the academic and scientific
community, including through the sharing of
unclassified data and relevant case studies;
(D) sharing of best practices for addressing and
mitigating the threats and risks identified in
subparagraph (B); and
(E) examination of potential near- and long-term
responses by the Government and the academic and
scientific community to mitigate and address the
risks associated with foreign threats.
(4) REPORT AND BRIEFING.—The joint agreement under
paragraph (1) shall specify that—
(A) the roundtable shall periodically organize
workshops and issue publicly available reports on
the topics described in paragraph (3) and the
activities of the roundtable;
(B) not later than March 1, 2020, the Academies
shall provide a briefing to the relevant committees
on the progress and activities of the roundtable;
and
(C) the Academies shall issue a final report on its
activities to the relevant committees before the end
of fiscal year 2024.
(5) TERMINATION.—The roundtable shall terminate on
September 30, 2024.
(c) Definitions.—In this section:
(1) The term “Academies” means the National
Academies of Science, Engineering and
Medicine.
(2) The term “Federal science agency” means any Federal
agency with at least $100,000,000 in basic and applied
research obligations in fiscal year 2018.
(3) The term “grantee” means an entity that is—
(A) a recipient or subrecipient of a Federal grant or
cooperative agreement; and
(B) an institution of higher education or a non-profit
organization.
(4) The term “relevant committees” means—
(A) the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of
the House of Representatives;
(B) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate;
(C) the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives;
(D) the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate; and
(E) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate.
######
Subtitle A—Military Construction Program
SEC. 2801. MILITARY INSTALLATION RESILIENCE PLANS
AND PROJECTS.
(a) Inclusion of Military Installation Resilience
Information in Certain Installation Master Plans.—
(1) REQUIREMENT.—Section 2864 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended—
(A) in subsection (a)(1), by inserting “military
installation resilience,” after “master planning,”;
(B) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as
subsections (e) and (f), respectively; and
(C) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new
subsection:
“(c) Military Installation Resilience Component.—To
address military installation resilience under
subsection (a)(1), each installation master plan shall
discuss the following:
“(1) Risks and threats to military installation
resilience that exist at the time of the development of
the plan and that are projected for the future,
including from extreme weather events, mean sea level
fluctuation, wildfires, flooding, and other changes in
environmental conditions.
“(2) Assets or infrastructure located on the military
installation vulnerable to the risks and threats
described in paragraph (1), with a special emphasis on
assets or infrastructure critical to the mission of the
installation and the mission of members of the armed
forces.
“(3) Lessons learned from the impacts of extreme weather
events, including changes made to the military
installation to address such impacts, since the prior
master plan developed under this section.
“(4) Ongoing or planned infrastructure projects or other
measures, as of the time of the development of the plan,
to mitigate the impacts of the risks and threats
described in paragraph (1).
“(5) Community infrastructure and resources located
outside the installation (such as medical facilities,
transportation systems, and energy infrastructure) that
are—
“(A) necessary to maintain mission capability or that
impact the resilience of the military installation; and
“(B) vulnerable to the risks and threats described in
paragraph (1).
“(6) Agreements in effect or planned, as of the time of
the development of the plan, with public or private
entities for the purpose of maintaining or enhancing
military installation resilience or resilience of the
community infrastructure and resources described in
paragraph (5).
“(7) Projections from recognized governmental and
scientific entities such as the Census Bureau, the
National Academies of Sciences, the United States
Geological Survey, and the United States Global
Change Research Office (or any similar successor
entities) with respect to future risks and threats
(including the risks and threats described in
paragraph (1)) to the resilience of any project
considered in the installation master plan during
the 50-year lifespan of the installation.”.
(2) REPORT ON MASTER PLANS.—Section 2864 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by inserting after
subsection (c), as added by subsection (a), the
following new subsection:
“(d) Report.—Not later than March 1 of each year, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report listing all master plans
completed pursuant to this section in the prior calendar
year.”.
(b) Authority to Carry Out Military Installation
Resilience Projects.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter I of chapter 169 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following new section:
Ҥ 2815. Military installation resilience projects
“(a) Projects Required.—The Secretary of Defense shall
carry out military construction projects for military
installation resilience, in accordance with section 2802
of this title.
“(b) Congressional Notification.—(1) When a decision is
made to carry out a project under this section, the
Secretary of Defense shall notify the congressional
defense committees of that decision.
“(2) The Secretary of Defense shall include in each
notification submitted under paragraph (1) the rationale
for how the project would—
“(A) enhance military installation resilience;
“(B) enhance mission assurance;
“(C) support mission critical functions; and
“(D) address known vulnerabilities.
“(c) Timing of Projects.—A project may be carried out
under this section only after the end of the 14-day
period beginning on the date that notification with
respect to that project under subsection (b) is received
by the congressional defense committees in an electronic
medium pursuant to section 480 of this title.
“(d) Annual Report.—Not later than 90 days after the end
of each fiscal year until December 31, 2025, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report on the status of the planned
and active projects carried out under this section
(including completed projects), and shall include in the
report with respect to each such project the following
information:
“(1) The title, location, a brief description of the
scope of work, the original project cost estimate, and
the current working cost estimate.
“(2) The information provided under subsection (b)(2).
“(3) Such other information as the Secretary considers
appropriate.”.
(2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 169 of such title is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 2814 the
following new item:
“2815. Military installation resilience projects.”.
######
SEC. 3136. INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF CAPABILITIES FOR
DETECTION, VERIFICATION, AND MONITORING OF NUCLEAR
WEAPONS AND FISSILE MATERIAL.
(a) Plan.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy, in
consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall
seek to enter into a contract with the National
Academy of Sciences to conduct an independent review
and assessment of United States capabilities for
detection, verification, and monitoring of nuclear
weapons and fissile material.
(b) Elements.—The review and assessment required by
subsection (a) shall include the following:
(1) An evaluation of the current national research
enterprise for detection, verification, and
monitoring of nuclear weapons and fissile
material.
(2) Integration of roles, responsibilities, and
planning for such detection, verification, and
monitoring within the Federal Government.
(3) Opportunities to leverage the national research
enterprise to further prevent the proliferation of
nuclear weapons and fissile material, including with
respect to policy, research and development, and
testing and evaluation.
(4) Opportunities for international engagement for
building cooperation and transparency, including
bilateral and multilateral efforts, to improve
inspections, detection, and monitoring of nuclear
weapons and fissile material, and to create
incentives for such cooperation and
transparency.
(5) Opportunities for new or expanded research and
development efforts to improve detection and
monitoring of, and in-field inspection and analysis
capabilities with respect to, nuclear weapons and
fissile materials.
(6) Opportunities for improved coordination between
departments and agencies of the Federal Government
and the military departments, national laboratories,
commercial industry, and academia.
(7) Opportunities for leveraging commercial
capabilities.
(c) Submission to Congress.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Energy shall submit to the congressional defense
committees, without change, the findings of the
National Academy resulting from the review and
assessment conducted under subsection (a).
(2) FORM.—The findings described in paragraph (1)
shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may
include a classified annex.
SEC. 3137. ASSESSMENT OF HIGH ENERGY DENSITY
PHYSICS.
(a) In General.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Administrator for Nuclear
Security shall enter into an arrangement with the
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and
Medicine to conduct an assessment of recent advances
and the current status of research in the field of
high energy density physics.
(b) Elements.—The assessment conducted under
subsection (a) shall include the following:
(1) Theoretical and computational modeling of high
energy density material phases, radiation-matter
interactions, plasmas atypical of astrophysical
conditions, and conditions unique to the National
Nuclear Security Administration.
(2) The simulation of such phases, interactions,
plasmas, and conditions.
(3) Instrumentation and target fabrication.
(4) Workforce training.
(5) An assessment of advancements made by other
countries in high energy density physics.
(6) Such others items as are agreed upon by the
Administrator and the National Academies.
(c) Applicability of Internal Controls.—The
assessment under subsection (a) shall be conducted
in accordance with the internal controls of the
National Academies.
(d) Report to Congress.—Not later than 18 months
after entering into the arrangement under subsection
(a), the National Academies of Sciences,
Engineering, and Medicine shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report on the
assessment conducted under that subsection.
(e) High Energy Density Physics Defined.—In this
section, the term “high energy density physics” means
the physics of matter and radiation at—
(1) energy densities exceeding 100,000,000,000 joules
per cubic meter; and
(2) other temperature and pressure ranges within the
warm dense matter regime.
######
SEC. 3203. MEMBERSHIP OF DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES
SAFETY BOARD.
(a) List of Candidates for Nomination.—Subsection (b) of
section 311 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2286) is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
“(4) The President shall enter into an arrangement
with the National Academy of Sciences under which
the National Academy shall maintain a list of
individuals who meet the qualifications described in
paragraph (1) to assist the President in selecting
individuals to nominate for positions as members of
the Board.”.
(b) Terms of Members.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (d) of such section is
amended—
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking the second sentence
and inserting the following new sentences: “A member may
be reappointed for a second term only if the member was
confirmed by the Senate more than two years into the
member’s first term. A member may not be reappointed for
a third term.”; and
(B) in paragraph (3)—
(i) by striking “Any member” and inserting “(A) Any
member”;
(ii) by striking the second sentence; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following new
subparagraph:
“(B) A member may not serve after the expiration of the
member’s term, unless the departure of the member would
result in the loss of a quorum for the Board. If more
than one member is serving after the expiration of the
member’s term and a new member is appointed to the Board
so that one of the members serving after the expiration
of the member’s term is no longer necessary to maintain
a quorum, the member whose term expired first may no
longer serve on the Board.”.
(2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by paragraph (1)
shall take effect on the date that is one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Filling Vacancies.—Such subsection is further
amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
“(4)(A) Not later than 180 days after the expiration of
the term of a member of the Board, the President shall—
“(i) submit to the Senate the nomination of an
individual to fill the vacancy; or
“(ii) submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the
Senate a report that includes—
“(I) a description of the reasons the President did not
submit such a nomination; and
“(II) a plan for submitting such a nomination during the
90-day period following the submission of the report.
“(B) If the President does not submit to the Senate the
nomination of an individual to fill a vacancy during the
90-day period described in subclause (II) of
subparagraph (A)(ii), the President shall submit to the
Committee on Armed Services a report described in that
subparagraph not less frequently than every 90 days
until the President submits such a nomination.”.
######
*******************************************************************************************************************************************************************
HRpt 116-333 - To accompany S. 1790 – [T]o authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2020 for military
activities of the Department of Defense, for military
construction, and for defense activities of the
Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel
strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.
Conference Committee
(12/9/19)
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
######
SEC. 262. NATIONAL STUDY ON DEFENSE RESEARCH AT
HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES AND
OTHER MINORITY INSTITUTIONS.
(a) Study Required.—The Secretary of Defense shall seek to enter into
an agreement with the National Academies of
Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (referred to in
this section as the “National Academies”) under
which the National Academies will conduct a study on
the status of defense research at covered
institutions and the methods and means necessary to
advance research capacity at covered institutions to
comprehensively address the national security and
defense needs of the United States.
(b) Designation.—The study conducted under
subsection (a) shall be known as the “National Study
on Defense Research At Historically Black Colleges
and Universities and Other Minority
Institutions”.
(c) Elements.—The study conducted under subsection
(a) shall include an examination of each of the
following:
(1) The degree to which covered institutions are
successful in competing for and executing Department
of Defense contracts and grants for defense
research.
(2) Best practices for advancing the capacity of
covered institutions to compete for and conduct
research programs related to national security and
defense.
(3) The advancements and investments necessary to
elevate covered institutions to R2 status or R1
status on the Carnegie Classification of
Institutions of Higher Education, consistent with
the criteria of the classification system.
(4) The facilities and infrastructure for
defense-related research at covered institutions as
compared to the facilities and infrastructure at
institutions classified as R1 status on the Carnegie
Classification of Institutions of Higher
Education.
(5) Incentives to attract, recruit, and retain
leading research faculty to covered
institutions.
(6) Best practices of institutions classified as R1
status on the Carnegie Classification of
Institutions of Higher Education, including best
practices with respect to—
(A) the establishment of a distinct legal entity
to—
(i) enter into contracts or receive grants from the
Department;
(ii) lay the groundwork for future research
opportunities;
(iii) develop research proposals;
(iv) engage with defense research funding
organizations; and
(v) execute the administration of grants; and
(B) determining the type of legal entity, if any,
to establish for the purposes described in
subparagraph (A).
(7) The ability of covered institutions to develop,
protect, and commercialize intellectual property
created through defense-related research.
(8) The total amount of defense research funding
awarded to all institutions of higher education,
including covered institutions, through contracts
and grants for each of fiscal years 2010 through
2019 and, with respect to each such
institution—
(A) whether the institution established a distinct
legal entity to enter into contracts or receive
grants from the Department and, if so, the type of
legal entity that was established;
(B) the total value of contracts and grants awarded
to the institution of higher education for each of
fiscal years 2010 through 2019;
(C) the overhead rate of the institution of higher
education for fiscal year 2019;
(D) the institution’s classification on the
Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher
Education; and
(E) whether the institution qualifies as a covered
institution.
(9) Recommendations for strengthening and enhancing
the programs executed under section 2362 of title
10, United States Code.
(10) Recommendations to enhance the capacity of
covered institutions to transition research products
into defense acquisition programs or
commercialization.
(11) Previous executive or legislative actions by
the Federal Government to address imbalances in
Federal research funding, including such programs as
the Defense Established Program to Stimulate
Competitive Research (commonly known as
“DEPSCoR”).
(12) The effectiveness of the Department in
attracting and retaining students specializing in
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
fields from covered institutions for the
Department’s programs on emerging capabilities and
technologies.
(13) Recommendations for the development of
incentives to encourage research and educational
collaborations between covered institutions and
other institutions of higher education.
(14) Any other matters the Secretary of Defense
determines to be relevant to advancing the defense
research capacity of covered institutions.
(d) Reports.—
(1) INITIAL REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after
the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary
of Defense shall submit to the President and the
appropriate congressional committees an initial
report that includes—
(A) the findings of the study conducted under
subsection (a); and
(B) any recommendations that the National Academies
may have for action by the executive branch and
Congress to improve the participation of covered
institutions in Department of Defense research and
any actions that may be carried out to expand the
research capacity of such institutions.
(2) FINAL REPORT.—Not later than December 31, 2021,
the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the
President and the appropriate congressional
committees a comprehensive report on the results of
the study required under subsection (a).
(3) FORM OF REPORTS.—Each report submitted under
this subsection shall be made publicly
available.
(e) Implementation Required.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), not
later than March 1, 2022, the Secretary of Defense shall
commence implementation of each recommendation included
in the final report submitted under subsection (d)(2).
(2) EXCEPTIONS.—
(A) DELAYED IMPLEMENTATION.—The Secretary of Defense may
commence implementation of a recommendation described
paragraph (1) later than March 1, 2022, if—
(i) the Secretary submits to the congressional defense
committees written notice of the intent of the Secretary
to delay implementation of the recommendation; and
(ii) includes, as part of such notice, a specific
justification for the delay in implementing the
recommendation.
(B) NONIMPLEMENTATION.—The Secretary of Defense may
elect not to implement a recommendation described in
paragraph (1), if—
(i) the Secretary submits to the congressional defense
committees written notice of the intent of the Secretary
not to implement the recommendation; and
(ii) includes, as part of such notice—
(I) the reasons for the Secretary’s decision not to
implement the recommendation; and
(II) a summary of alternative actions the Secretary will
carry out to address the purposes underlying the
recommendation.
(3) IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.—For each recommendation that
the Secretary implements under this subsection, the
Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense
committees an implementation plan that includes—
(A) a summary of actions that have been, or will be,
carried out to implement the recommendation; and
(B) a schedule, with specific milestones, for completing
the implementation of the recommendation.
(f) List of Covered Institutions.—The Secretary of
Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of
Education and the Presidents of the National
Academies, shall make available a list identifying
each covered institution examined as part of the
study under subsection (a). The list shall be made
available on a publicly accessible website and shall
be updated not less frequently than once annually
until the date on which the final report is
submitted under subsection (d)(2).
(g) Definitions.—In this section:
(1) The term “appropriate congressional committees”
means—
(A) the congressional defense committees;
(B) the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions of the Senate; and
(C) the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of
Representatives.
(2) The term “covered institution” means—
(A) a part B institution (as that term is defined in
section 322(2) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1061(2)); or
(B) any other institution of higher education (as that
term is defined in section 101 of such Act (20 U.S.C.
1001)) at which not less than 50 percent of the total
student enrollment consists of students from ethnic
groups that are underrepresented in the fields of
science and engineering.
######
SEC. 1674. INDEPENDENT STUDY ON RISKS OF NUCLEAR
TERRORISM AND NUCLEAR WAR.
(a) In General.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense
shall enter into an agreement with the National
Academy of Sciences to conduct a study on—
(1) whether a risk assessment framework is
applicable to determining the potential risks of
nuclear terrorism and nuclear war; and
(2) the implications for national security of
assumptions in nuclear policy and doctrine.
(b) Matters Included.—The study under subsection
(a) shall—
(1) identify risks described in paragraph (1) of
that subsection;
(2) assess prior literature on such risks;
(3) assess the role that quantitative and
nonquantitative analytical methods can play in
assessing such risks, including the limitations of
such analysis;
(4) identify and examine the assumptions about
nuclear risks that underlie the national security
strategy of the United States; and
(5) describe the consequences of the methods and
assumptions that have been, are, or could be used in
developing the nuclear security strategy of the
United States.
(c) Recommendations.—Based on findings under
subsection (b), the study may provide
recommendations with respect to improving the use of
a risk assessment framework described in subsection
(a)(1).
(d) Submission.—Not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary
shall submit to the congressional defense committees
the study under subsection (a), without
change.
(e) Form.—The study shall be submitted in
unclassified form, but may include a classified
annex.
######
SEC. 1746. SECURING AMERICAN SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY.
(a) Interagency Working Group.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Director of the Office of Science
and Technology Policy, acting through the National
Science and Technology Council, in consultation with the
National Security Advisor, shall establish or designate
an interagency working group to coordinate activities to
protect federally funded research and development from
foreign interference, cyber attacks, theft, or espionage
and to develop common definitions and best practices for
Federal science agencies and grantees, while accounting
for the importance of the open exchange of ideas and
international talent required for scientific progress
and American leadership in science and technology.
(2) MEMBERSHIP.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—The working group shall include at least
one representative of—
(i) the National Science Foundation;
(ii) the Department of Energy;
(iii) the National Aeronautics and Space Administration;
(iv) the Department of Commerce;
(v) the Department of Health and Human Services;
(vi) the Department of Defense;
(vii) the Department of Agriculture;
(viii) the Department of Education;
(ix) the Department of State;
(x) the Department of the Treasury;
(xi) the Department of Justice;
(xii) the Department of Homeland Security;
(xiii) the Central Intelligence Agency;
(xiv) the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence;
(xv) the Office of Management and Budget;
(xvi) the National Economic Council; and
(xvii) such other Federal department or agency as the
President considers appropriate.
(B) CHAIR.—The working group shall be chaired by the
Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy
(or the Director’s designee).
(3) RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE WORKING GROUP.—The working
group established under paragraph (1) shall—
(A) identify known and potential cyber, physical, and
human intelligence threats and vulnerabilities within
the United States scientific and technological
enterprise;
(B) coordinate efforts among agencies to share and
update important information, including specific
examples of foreign interference, cyber attacks, theft,
or espionage directed at federally funded research and
development or the integrity of the United States
scientific enterprise;
(C) identify and assess existing mechanisms for
protection of federally funded research and development;
(D) develop an inventory of—
(i) terms and definitions used across Federal science
agencies to delineate areas that may require additional
protection; and
(ii) policies and procedures at Federal science agencies
regarding protection of federally funded research; and
(E) develop and periodically update unclassified
recommendations for policy guidance to assist Federal
science agencies and grantees in defending against
threats to federally funded research and development and
the integrity of the United States scientific enterprise
that—
(i) includes—
(I) descriptions of known and potential threats to
federally funded research and development and the
integrity of the United States scientific enterprise;
(II) common definitions and terminology for
categorization of research and technologies that are
protected;
(III) identified areas of research or technology that
might require additional protection;
(IV) recommendations for how control mechanisms can be
utilized to protect federally funded research and
development from foreign interference, cyber attacks,
theft or espionage, including any recommendations for
updates to existing control mechanisms;
(V) recommendations for best practices for Federal
science agencies, universities, and grantees to defend
against threats to federally funded research and
development, including coordination and harmonization of
any relevant reporting requirements that Federal science
agencies implement for grantees, and by providing such
best practices with grantees and universities at the
time of awarding such grants or entering into research
contracts;
(VI) a remediation plan for grantees and universities to
mitigate the risks regarding such threats before
research grants or contracts are cancelled because of
such threats;
(VII) recommendations for providing opportunities and
facilities for academic researchers to perform
controlled and classified research in support of Federal
missions;
(VIII) assessments of potential consequences that any
proposed practices would have on international
collaboration and United States leadership in science
and technology; and
(IX) a classified addendum as necessary to further
inform Federal science agency decisionmaking; and
(ii) accounts for the range of needs across different
sectors of the United States science and technology
enterprise.
(4) POLICY GUIDANCE.—Not later than 270 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the
Office of Science and Technology Policy, in consultation
with the working group established under paragraph (1),
shall—
(A) develop and issue policy guidance to Federal science
agencies with more than $100,000,000 in extramural
research in fiscal year 2018 to protect against threats
to federally funded research and the United States
science enterprise, including foreign interference,
cyber attacks, theft, or espionage; and
(B) encourage consistency in the policies developed by
Federal science agencies with more than $100,000,000 in
extramural research in fiscal year 2018, as appropriate,
and factoring in the potential range of applications
across different areas of science and technology.
(5) COORDINATION WITH NATIONAL ACADEMIES
ROUNDTABLE.—The Director of the Office of Science
and Technology Policy shall coordinate with the
Academies to ensure that at least one member of the
interagency working group is also a member of the
roundtable under subsection (b).
(6) INTERIM REPORT.—Not later than six months after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the
Office of Science and Technology Policy shall provide a
report to the relevant committees that includes the
inventory required under paragraph (3)(D), and an update
on progress toward developing the policy guidance
required under paragraphs (3)(E) and (4), as well as any
additional activities undertaken by the working group in
that time.
(7) BIENNIAL REPORTING.—Two years after the date of
enactment of this Act, and at least every two years
thereafter, the Director of the Office of Science and
Technology Policy shall provide a summary report to the
relevant committees on the activities of the working
group and the most current version of the policy
guidance required under paragraph (4).
(8) TERMINATION.—The working group established or
designated under paragraph (1) shall terminate on the
date that is ten years after the date on which such
working group is established or designated.
(b) National Academies Science, Technology and
Security Roundtable.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The National Science Foundation,
the Department of Energy, and the Department of
Defense, and any other agencies as determined by the
Director of the Office of Science and Technology
Policy, shall enter into a joint agreement with the
Academies to create a new “National Science,
Technology, and Security Roundtable” (hereinafter in
this subsection referred to as the
“roundtable”).
(2) PARTICIPANTS.—The roundtable shall include
senior representatives and practitioners from
Federal science, intelligence, and national security
agencies, law enforcement, as well as key
stakeholders in the United States scientific
enterprise including institutions of higher
education, Federal research laboratories, industry,
and non-profit research organizations.
(3) PURPOSE.—The purpose of the roundtable is to
facilitate among participants—
(A) exploration of critical issues related to
protecting United States national and economic
security while ensuring the open exchange of ideas
and international talent required for scientific
progress and American leadership in science and
technology;
(B) identification and consideration of security
threats and risks involving federally funded
research and development, including foreign
interference, cyber attacks, theft, or
espionage;
(C) identification of effective approaches for
communicating the threats and risks identified in
subparagraph (b) to the academic and scientific
community, including through the sharing of
unclassified data and relevant case studies;
(D) sharing of best practices for addressing and
mitigating the threats and risks identified in
subparagraph (B); and
(E) examination of potential near- and long-term
responses by the Government and the academic and
scientific community to mitigate and address the
risks associated with foreign threats.
(4) REPORT AND BRIEFING.—The joint agreement under
paragraph (1) shall specify that—
(A) the roundtable shall periodically organize
workshops and issue publicly available reports on
the topics described in paragraph (3) and the
activities of the roundtable;
(B) not later than March 1, 2020, the Academies
shall provide a briefing to the relevant committees
on the progress and activities of the roundtable;
and
(C) the Academies shall issue a final report on its
activities to the relevant committees before the end
of fiscal year 2024.
(5) TERMINATION.—The roundtable shall terminate on
September 30, 2024.
(c) Definitions.—In this section:
(1) The term “Academies” means the National
Academies of Science, Engineering and
Medicine.
(2) The term “Federal science agency” means any Federal
agency with at least $100,000,000 in basic and applied
research obligations in fiscal year 2018.
(3) The term “grantee” means an entity that is—
(A) a recipient or subrecipient of a Federal grant or
cooperative agreement; and
(B) an institution of higher education or a non-profit
organization.
(4) The term “relevant committees” means—
(A) the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of
the House of Representatives;
(B) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate;
(C) the Committee on Armed Services of the House of
Representatives;
(D) the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate; and
(E) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate.
######
SUBTITLE A—MILITARY CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM
SEC. 2801. MILITARY INSTALLATION RESILIENCE PLANS
AND PROJECTS.
(a) Inclusion of Military Installation Resilience
Information in Certain Installation Master Plans.—
(1) REQUIREMENT.—Section 2864 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended—
(A) in subsection (a)(1), by inserting “military
installation resilience,” after “master planning,”;
(B) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as
subsections (e) and (f), respectively; and
(C) by inserting after subsection (b) the following new
subsection:
“(c) Military Installation Resilience Component.—To
address military installation resilience under
subsection (a)(1), each installation master plan shall
discuss the following:
“(1) Risks and threats to military installation
resilience that exist at the time of the development of
the plan and that are projected for the future,
including from extreme weather events, mean sea level
fluctuation, wildfires, flooding, and other changes in
environmental conditions.
“(2) Assets or infrastructure located on the military
installation vulnerable to the risks and threats
described in paragraph (1), with a special emphasis on
assets or infrastructure critical to the mission of the
installation and the mission of members of the armed
forces.
“(3) Lessons learned from the impacts of extreme weather
events, including changes made to the military
installation to address such impacts, since the prior
master plan developed under this section.
“(4) Ongoing or planned infrastructure projects or other
measures, as of the time of the development of the plan,
to mitigate the impacts of the risks and threats
described in paragraph (1).
“(5) Community infrastructure and resources located
outside the installation (such as medical facilities,
transportation systems, and energy infrastructure) that
are—
“(A) necessary to maintain mission capability or that
impact the resilience of the military installation; and
“(B) vulnerable to the risks and threats described in
paragraph (1).
“(6) Agreements in effect or planned, as of the time of
the development of the plan, with public or private
entities for the purpose of maintaining or enhancing
military installation resilience or resilience of the
community infrastructure and resources described in
paragraph (5).
“(7) Projections from recognized governmental and
scientific entities such as the Census Bureau, the
National Academies of Sciences, the United States
Geological Survey, and the United States Global
Change Research Office (or any similar successor
entities) with respect to future risks and threats
(including the risks and threats described in
paragraph (1)) to the resilience of any project
considered in the installation master plan during
the 50-year lifespan of the installation.”.
(2) REPORT ON MASTER PLANS.—Section 2864 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by inserting after
subsection (c), as added by subsection (a), the
following new subsection:
“(d) Report.—Not later than March 1 of each year, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report listing all master plans
completed pursuant to this section in the prior calendar
year.”.
(b) Authority to Carry Out Military Installation
Resilience Projects.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter I of chapter 169 of title 10,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following new section:
Ҥ 2815. Military installation resilience projects
“(a) Projects Required.—The Secretary of Defense shall
carry out military construction projects for military
installation resilience, in accordance with section 2802
of this title.
“(b) Congressional Notification.—(1) When a decision is
made to carry out a project under this section, the
Secretary of Defense shall notify the congressional
defense committees of that decision.
“(2) The Secretary of Defense shall include in each
notification submitted under paragraph (1) the rationale
for how the project would—
“(A) enhance military installation resilience;
“(B) enhance mission assurance;
“(C) support mission critical functions; and
“(D) address known vulnerabilities.
“(c) Timing of Projects.—A project may be carried out
under this section only after the end of the 14-day
period beginning on the date that notification with
respect to that project under subsection (b) is received
by the congressional defense committees in an electronic
medium pursuant to section 480 of this title.
“(d) Annual Report.—Not later than 90 days after the end
of each fiscal year until December 31, 2025, the
Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional
defense committees a report on the status of the planned
and active projects carried out under this section
(including completed projects), and shall include in the
report with respect to each such project the following
information:
“(1) The title, location, a brief description of the
scope of work, the original project cost estimate, and
the current working cost estimate.
“(2) The information provided under subsection (b)(2).
“(3) Such other information as the Secretary considers
appropriate.”.
(2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 169 of such title is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 2814 the
following new item:
“2815. Military installation resilience projects.”.
######
SEC. 3136. INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF CAPABILITIES FOR
DETECTION, VERIFICATION, AND MONITORING OF NUCLEAR
WEAPONS AND FISSILE MATERIAL.
(a) Plan.—Not later than 30 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Energy, in
consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall
seek to enter into a contract with the National
Academy of Sciences to conduct an independent review
and assessment of United States capabilities for
detection, verification, and monitoring of nuclear
weapons and fissile material.
(b) Elements.—The review and assessment required by
subsection (a) shall include the following:
(1) An evaluation of the current national research
enterprise for detection, verification, and
monitoring of nuclear weapons and fissile
material.
(2) Integration of roles, responsibilities, and
planning for such detection, verification, and
monitoring within the Federal Government.
(3) Opportunities to leverage the national research
enterprise to further prevent the proliferation of
nuclear weapons and fissile material, including with
respect to policy, research and development, and
testing and evaluation.
(4) Opportunities for international engagement for
building cooperation and transparency, including
bilateral and multilateral efforts, to improve
inspections, detection, and monitoring of nuclear
weapons and fissile material, and to create
incentives for such cooperation and
transparency.
(5) Opportunities for new or expanded research and
development efforts to improve detection and
monitoring of, and in-field inspection and analysis
capabilities with respect to, nuclear weapons and
fissile materials.
(6) Opportunities for improved coordination between
departments and agencies of the Federal Government
and the military departments, national laboratories,
commercial industry, and academia.
(7) Opportunities for leveraging commercial
capabilities.
(c) Submission to Congress.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Energy shall submit to the congressional defense
committees, without change, the findings of the
National Academy resulting from the review and
assessment conducted under subsection (a).
(2) FORM.—The findings described in paragraph (1)
shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may
include a classified annex.
SEC. 3137. ASSESSMENT OF HIGH ENERGY DENSITY
PHYSICS.
(a) In General.—Not later than 90 days after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Administrator for Nuclear
Security shall enter into an arrangement with the
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and
Medicine to conduct an assessment of recent advances
and the current status of research in the field of
high energy density physics.
(b) Elements.—The assessment conducted under
subsection (a) shall include the following:
(1) Theoretical and computational modeling of high
energy density material phases, radiation-matter
interactions, plasmas atypical of astrophysical
conditions, and conditions unique to the National
Nuclear Security Administration.
(2) The simulation of such phases, interactions,
plasmas, and conditions.
(3) Instrumentation and target fabrication.
(4) Workforce training.
(5) An assessment of advancements made by other
countries in high energy density physics.
(6) Such others items as are agreed upon by the
Administrator and the National Academies.
(c) Applicability of Internal Controls.—The
assessment under subsection (a) shall be conducted
in accordance with the internal controls of the
National Academies.
(d) Report to Congress.—Not later than 18 months
after entering into the arrangement under subsection
(a), the National Academies of Sciences,
Engineering, and Medicine shall submit to the
congressional defense committees a report on the
assessment conducted under that subsection.
(e) High Energy Density Physics Defined.—In this
section, the term “high energy density physics” means
the physics of matter and radiation at—
(1) energy densities exceeding 100,000,000,000 joules
per cubic meter; and
(2) other temperature and pressure ranges within the
warm dense matter regime.
######
SEC. 3203. MEMBERSHIP OF DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES
SAFETY BOARD.
(a) List of Candidates for Nomination.—Subsection (b) of
section 311 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2286) is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
“(4) The President shall enter into an arrangement
with the National Academy of Sciences under which
the National Academy shall maintain a list of
individuals who meet the qualifications described in
paragraph (1) to assist the President in selecting
individuals to nominate for positions as members of
the Board.”.
(b) Terms of Members.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (d) of such section is
amended—
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking the second sentence
and inserting the following new sentences: “A member may
be reappointed for a second term only if the member was
confirmed by the Senate more than two years into the
member’s first term. A member may not be reappointed for
a third term.”; and
(B) in paragraph (3)—
(i) by striking “Any member” and inserting “(A) Any
member”;
(ii) by striking the second sentence; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following new
subparagraph:
“(B) A member may not serve after the expiration of the
member’s term, unless the departure of the member would
result in the loss of a quorum for the Board. If more
than one member is serving after the expiration of the
member’s term and a new member is appointed to the Board
so that one of the members serving after the expiration
of the member’s term is no longer necessary to maintain
a quorum, the member whose term expired first may no
longer serve on the Board.”.
(2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by paragraph (1)
shall take effect on the date that is one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Filling Vacancies.—Such subsection is further
amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
“(4)(A) Not later than 180 days after the expiration of
the term of a member of the Board, the President shall—
“(i) submit to the Senate the nomination of an
individual to fill the vacancy; or
“(ii) submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the
Senate a report that includes—
“(I) a description of the reasons the President did not
submit such a nomination; and
“(II) a plan for submitting such a nomination during the
90-day period following the submission of the report.
“(B) If the President does not submit to the Senate the
nomination of an individual to fill a vacancy during the
90-day period described in subclause (II) of
subparagraph (A)(ii), the President shall submit to the
Committee on Armed Services a report described in that
subparagraph not less frequently than every 90 days
until the President submits such a nomination.”.
######
*******************************************************************************************************************************************************************
JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF THE COMMITTEE OF
CONFERENCE
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
######
National Study on Defense Research at Historically
Black Colleges and Universities and Other Minority
Institutions (sec. 262)
The House amendment contained a provision (sec. 240)
that would establish an independent Federal commission
to advance the research capability of Historically Black
Colleges and Universities and other Minority
Institutions.
The Senate bill contained no similar provision.
The Senate recedes with an amendment that would
modify the provision to require the Secretary of
Defense to commission an independent National
Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
study to review the state of defense research at
covered institutions. The provision would also
require the Department of Defense to develop an
implementation plan in response to the
recommendations of the study.
######
Independent study on risks of nuclear terrorism and
nuclear war (sec. 1674)
The House amendment contained a provision (sec.
1650) that would require the Secretary of Defense to
enter into a contract with the National Academy of
Sciences to conduct a study on the potential risks
of nuclear terrorism and nuclear war.
The Senate bill contained no similar provision.
The Senate recedes with amendments that would
modify a number of elements of the required
study.
######
Independent study on impacts of missile defense
development and deployment (sec. 1692)
The House amendment contained a provision (sec.
1672) that would require the Secretary of Defense to
enter into an agreement with the National Academy of
Sciences to conduct a study on the impacts of the
development and deployment of U.S. long-range
missile defenses on the security of the United
States as a whole.
The Senate bill contained no similar provision.
The Senate recedes with several clarifying
amendments and an amendment that would change the entity
conducting the study to a federally funded research
and development center.
######
Independent review of capabilities for detection,
verification, and monitoring of nuclear weapons and
fissile material (sec. 3136)
The House amendment contained a provision (sec.
3121) that would require the Secretary of Energy to
enter into a contract with the National Academy of
Sciences to conduct an independent review and
assessment of a plan for nuclear detection and
verification and monitoring of nuclear weapons and
fissile material. The provision would require the
Secretary to submit the resulting study to the
congressional defense committees no later than 270
days from the date of enactment of this Act.
The Senate bill contained no similar provision.
The Senate recedes with amendments that would
modify some elements of the study, and modify the
required date of submission to 1 year from the date
of enactment of this Act.
Assessment of high energy density physics (sec.
3137)
The Senate bill contained a provision (sec. 3125)
that would require the Administrator for Nuclear
Security to enter into an arrangement with the
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and
Medicine to conduct an assessment of the current
status of the field of high energy density
physics.
The House amendment contained no similar provision.
The House recedes.
######
Membership of Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety
Board (sec. 3203)
The Senate bill contained a provision (sec. 3203,
as modified by sec. 8202) that would require the
National Academy of Sciences to maintain a list of
qualified individuals for consideration for
nomination to fill vacancies on the Defense Nuclear
Facilities Safety Board. The provision would also
prohibit Board members from serving on expired
terms, and prohibit Board members from being
nominated for two consecutive terms, unless the
member was confirmed by the Senate more than 2 years
into the member’s first term; such changes would
take effect on April 1, 2020. Finally, the provision
would include measures to encourage the President to
promptly submit nominations to fill vacant
seats.
The House amendment contained no similar provision.
The House recedes with amendments that would
prohibit Board members from serving on expired
terms, unless the departure of a member would result
in the loss of a quorum for the Board. The
amendments would also modify the date of effect from
April 1, 2020, to 1 year from the date of enactment
of this Act.
######
|