[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



 


                                 ______

 
                   AN OVERVIEW OF THE BUDGET PROPOSAL
                FOR THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS
                  AND TECHNOLOGY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

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

                                     
                                     
                                     

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                      COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE,
                             AND TECHNOLOGY

                                 OF THE

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                              MAY 10, 2023

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-11

                               __________

 Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
 
 
 
 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

 

                      ______

             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 52-185 PDF          WASHINGTON : 2024                                      
                                     
                                     
                                     
                                     
                                     

       Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       

              COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY

                  HON. FRANK LUCAS, Oklahoma, Chairman
BILL POSEY, Florida                  ZOE LOFGREN, California, Ranking 
RANDY WEBER, Texas                       Member
BRIAN BABIN, Texas                   SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
JIM BAIRD, Indiana                   HALEY STEVENS, Michigan
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida              JAMAAL BOWMAN, New York
MIKE GARCIA, California              DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina
STEPHANIE BICE, Oklahoma             ERIC SORENSEN, Illinois
JAY OBERNOLTE, California            ANDREA SALINAS, Oregon
CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee         VALERIE FOUSHEE, North Carolina
DARRELL ISSA, California             KEVIN MULLIN, California
RICK CRAWFORD, Arkansas              JEFF JACKSON, North Carolina
CLAUDIA TENNEY, New York             EMILIA SYKES, Ohio
RYAN ZINKE, Montana                  MAXWELL FROST, Florida
SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida              YADIRA CARAVEO, Colorado
DALE STRONG, Alabama                 SUMMER LEE, Pennsylvania
MAX MILLER, Ohio                     JENNIFER McCLELLAN, Virginia
RICH McCORMICK, Georgia              TED LIEU, California
MIKE COLLINS, Georgia                SEAN CASTEN, Illinois,
BRANDON WILLIAMS, New York             Vice Ranking Member
TOM KEAN, New Jersey                 PAUL TONKO, New York
VACANCY
                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              May 10, 2023

                                                                   Page

Hearing Charter..................................................     2

                           Opening Statements

Statement by Representative Frank Lucas, Chairman, Committee on 
  Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives..    12
    Written Statement............................................    13

Statement by Representative Zoe Lofgren, Ranking Member, 
  Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of 
  Representatives................................................    14
    Written Statement............................................    15

                               Witnesses:

Dr. Laurie E. Locascio, Director, National Institute of Standards 
  and Technology
    Oral Statement...............................................    17
    Written Statement............................................    19

Discussion.......................................................    32

              Appendix: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions

Dr. Laurie E. Locascio, Director, National Institute of Standards 
  and Technology.................................................    74


                   AN OVERVIEW OF THE BUDGET PROPOSAL



                       FOR THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE



                      OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY



                          FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

                              ----------                              


                        WEDNESDAY, MAY 10, 2023

                          House of Representatives,
               Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
                                                   Washington, D.C.

    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:01 a.m., in 
room 2318, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Frank Lucas 
[Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


    Chairman Lucas. The Committee will come to order. Without 
objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a recess of the 
Committee at any time.
    Welcome to today's hearing entitled ``An Overview of the 
Budget Proposal for the National Institutes of Standards and 
Technology (NIST) for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024.'' I recognize 
myself for 5 minutes for an opening statement.
    Good morning again. Today's hearing will focus on the 
National Institute of Standards and Technology's budget 
proposal for the Fiscal Year 2024. And I would like to welcome 
the Hon. Dr. Locascio to the Committee for her first hearing 
and also thank her for taking the time to participate. I look 
forward to hearing your testimony.
    This Committee often emphasizes the science in the CHIPS 
and Science, but today, we have the opportunity to examine 
both. The CHIPS and Science Act provided $50 billion in Federal 
funding for the Department of Commerce to strengthen the U.S. 
position in semiconductor research, development, and 
manufacturing. NIST is home to the CHIPS Program Office and is 
responsible for overseeing how this funding is allocated and 
sent out the door. The $50 billion is quite the bump for an 
agency whose budget usually hasn't been even $1 billion 5 years 
ago. Today's hearing will give us insights into NIST's work 
implementing CHIPS and Science, as well as the overview of 
NIST's broader contributions to America's competitiveness.
    The CHIPS and Science Act also authorized critical research 
and investments at NIST to address key threats to U.S. 
competitiveness and innovation. The NIST for the Future Act, 
which was included in CHIPS and Science, codified this role in 
several areas, including bioengineering, advanced 
communication, cybersecurity, international standard setting, 
just to name a few examples.
    NIST is one of our Nation's oldest physical science 
laboratories. In 1901, Congress established the agency to 
support U.S. industrial competitiveness by improving 
measurements of infrastructure, which, at the time, were 
lagging behind the capacities of other nations. Fast-forward 
122 years, and NIST is doing just that, working as industry's 
laboratory to advance U.S. leadership in measurement science, 
standards, and technology to ensure the U.S. remain a global 
leader and does not lose its competitive edge.
    NIST measurements support the smallest of technologies to 
the largest and most complex, from computer chips to global 
communications networks, from nanoscale devices to earthquake-
resistant buildings. An endless number of products and services 
rely upon NIST's technologies, measurements, and standards in 
some way, shape, or form.
    As technologies rapidly develop and evolve, NIST research 
and development (R&D) continues to play a critical role in the 
U.S. national security, trade, and innovation. Prioritizing key 
research areas such as quantum information sciences and 
microelectronics, advanced manufacturing, cybersecurity, and 
artificial intelligence (AI) is growing more important every 
day as these technologies become increasingly necessary for 
technological development. Last year, NIST released the AI Risk 
Management Framework (AI RMF), a set of guidelines required by 
the National AI Initiative, a bill by this Committee, and I 
would like to commend NIST for the transparent, bottom-up 
approach it used to develop this framework, which ensures these 
voluntary guidance is useful to the broad community of AI 
stakeholders.
    This framework, the subsequent establishment of the 
Trustworthy and Responsible AI Resource Center, and the 
research and development NIST conducts on AI-enabled systems 
are going to provide--prove critical to our work to stay on the 
cutting edge of reliable and trustworthy AI technologies. This 
work is essentially important now as this technology is growing 
by leaps and bounds. I'm looking forward to seeing how 
organizations begin to adopt this voluntary guidance and 
hearing more about NIST's plans to support the safe development 
and adoption of this emerging technology.
    NIST also works with small- and medium-sized manufacturers 
to compete in the global marketplace through the Hollings 
Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program and 
Manufacturing USA Network. Through these programs, NIST helps 
U.S. manufacturers adopt new technologies and methods to 
overcome obstacles facing advanced manufacturers.
    NIST also works to ensure domestic supply chains are 
secure, resilient, and trustworthy. Promoting supply chain 
innovations will enable U.S. manufacturers to improve their 
efficiency, identify supply chain disruptions and quality 
issues, and bolster national and economic security. I look 
forward to hearing more about how public-private partnerships 
at NIST are promoting innovation in advanced manufacturing 
capacities and supply chain management. I also hope to hear 
about what progress MEP has made in establishing the national 
supply chain data base authorized in CHIPS and Science.
    It's quite a lot of ground to cover, but we in Congress 
have the responsibility to ensure that every taxpayer dollar is 
spent as effectively and as efficiently as possible. I hope we 
can use today's hearing to do just that.
    [The prepared statement of Chairman Lucas follows:]

    Good morning. Today's hearing will focus on the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) budget proposal 
for fiscal year 2024. I would like to welcome the Honorable Dr. 
Locascio to the Committee for her first hearing and also thank 
her for taking the time to participate. I look forward to 
hearing your testimony.
    This Committee often emphasizes the ``science'' in ``CHIPS 
& Science,'' but today we'll have the opportunity to examine 
both.
    The CHIPS and Science Act provided $50 billion in federal 
funding for the Department of Commerce to strengthen the U.S. 
position in semiconductor research, development, and 
manufacturing. NIST is home to the CHIPS Program Office and is 
responsible for overseeing how this funding is allocated and 
sent out the door. $50 billion is quite the bump for an agency 
whose budget wasn't even one billion dollars five years ago.
    Today's hearing will give us insights into NIST's work 
implementing CHIPS and Science, as well as an overview of 
NIST's broader contributions to America's competitiveness.
    The CHIPS and Science Act also authorized critical research 
and investments at NIST to address key threats to U.S. 
competitiveness and innovation.
    The NIST for the Future Act, which was included in CHIPS 
and Science, codified NIST's role in several areas including 
bioengineering, advanced communication, cybersecurity, and 
international standards-setting, just to name a few examples.
    NIST is one of our nation's oldest physical science 
laboratories. In 1901, Congress established the agency to 
support U.S. industrial competitiveness by improving 
measurement infrastructure, which at the time was lagging 
behind the capabilities of other nations.
    Fast forward 122 years and NIST is doing just that-working 
as ``industry's laboratory'' to advance U.S. leadership in 
measurement science, standards, and technology to ensure the 
U.S. remains a global leader and does not lose its competitive 
edge.
    NIST measurements support the smallest of technologies to 
the largest and most complex. From computer chips to global 
communications networks, nanoscale devices to earthquake-
resistant buildings, an endless number of products and services 
rely upon NIST technologies, measurements, and standards in 
some way, shape, or form.
    As technologies rapidly develop and evolve, NIST's research 
and development continues to play a critical role in U.S. 
national security, trade, and innovation.
    Prioritizing key research areas such as quantum information 
sciences, microelectronics, advanced manufacturing, 
cybersecurity, and artificial intelligence (AI) is growing more 
important every day, as these technologies become increasingly 
necessary for technological development.
    Last year NIST released the AI Risk Management Framework-a 
set of guidelines required by the National AI Initiative, a 
bill by this Committee. I would like to commend NIST for the 
transparent, bottom-up approach it used to develop this 
framework, which ensures this voluntary guidance is useful to 
the broad community of AI stakeholders.
    This Framework, the subsequent establishment of the 
``Trustworthy and Responsible A.I. Resource Center'', and the 
research and development NIST conducts on A.I.-enable systems 
are going to prove critical to our work to stay at the cutting 
edge of reliable and trustworthy A.I. technologies. That work 
is especially important now as this technology is growing by 
leaps and bounds.
    I'm looking forward to seeing how organizations begin to 
adopt this voluntary guidance and hearing more about NIST's 
plans to support the safe development and adoption of this 
emerging technology.
    NIST also works with small and medium-sized manufacturers 
to compete in the global marketplace through the Hollings 
Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program (MEP) and 
Manufacturing U.S.A. Network.
    Through these programs, NIST helps U.S. manufacturers adopt 
new technologies and methods to overcome obstacles facing 
advanced manufacturers.
    NIST also works to ensure domestic supply chains are 
secure, resilient, and trustworthy. Promoting supply chain 
innovations will enable U.S. manufacturers to improve their 
efficiency, identify supply-chain disruptions and quality 
issues, and bolster national and economic security.
    I look forward to hearing more about how public-private 
partnerships at NIST are promoting innovation in advanced 
manufacturing capabilities and supply chain management.
    I also hope to hear about what progress the MEP program has 
made in establishing the national supply chain database 
authorized in CHIPS and Science.
    That's quite a lot of ground to cover, but we in Congress 
have the responsibility to ensure every taxpayer dollar spent 
is used as effectively and efficiently as possible. I hope we 
can use today's hearing to do just that.
    Again, I thank our witness for being here today, and I look 
forward to your testimony.
    I now recognize the Ranking Member for her opening 
statement.

    Chairman Lucas. Again, I thank our witness for being here, 
and I look forward to your testimony.
    I now recognize the Ranking Member for her opening 
statement.
    Ms. Lofgren. Well, thank you very much, Chairman Lucas, and 
for today's hearing. And thank you, Dr. Locascio, for being 
here. It's really wonderful to see you again.
    NIST is, as we know, a small agency in the Department of 
Commerce, but you play a large role in promoting U.S. 
innovation and competitiveness by advancing our measurement 
science standards in technology. NIST actually does critical 
work in every sector of the economy--the American public may 
not know that, but we all do--from supporting small 
manufacturers, looking at domestic supply chains, creation of 
engineering standards and building codes to make our building 
safe. NIST develops cybersecurity guidelines for the Federal 
agencies and businesses alike to protect Americans' 
information.
    Congress and industry alike are asking NIST to take on more 
responsibility, even as the agency faces a crisis of failing 
infrastructure and unmet maintenance needs. And really, it's 
never exciting to focus on maintenance, but if you don't, you 
end up with a big bill to rebuild at the end. So the report 
from the National Academies in February of this year found that 
the deficiencies in facilities constitute a major threat to the 
mission and performance, and therefore, our Nation's economy 
and national security. So with leaking roofs and exploding 
pipes, ruining millions of dollars' worth of equipment, poor 
ventilation systems making it impossible for NIST to conduct 
certain experiments, routine requests for maintenance have had 
to be deferred for years. This has been a problem decades in 
the making, and I think this Committee, although we don't do 
the appropriations, needs to focus and advocate for addressing 
this need to be met if you are going to continue to provide the 
essential services that you do.
    I also want to just touch very quickly on the framework 
that you have provided at the request of Congress on AI 
systems. I have a worry that, as the voluntary guidelines that 
you produced in a very fine process may be actually not fast 
enough to keep up with industry is just roaring ahead in ways 
that--faster than any of us expected. And so while NIST is not 
a regulatory agency and there are limits to our discussion 
about that, we need to look to NIST for your deep technical 
expertise in informing debates about policy.
    As the Chairman has mentioned, NIST plays a key role in 
CHIPS for America program. This is very important for our 
country. And as we invest in chips manufacturing to solve a 
vulnerability for our country, I want to make sure that we're 
also addressing the safety of workers in those plants. I come 
from Silicon Valley, and in years past, there were issues of 
individual workers and even neighbors of fabs being exposed to 
toxic chemicals that created huge cancer, miscarriages, fetal 
abnormalities. Industry has moved way past that, much improved 
from that, but I do think we need to pay attention to toxicity 
and look at EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), who really 
are the gold standard on exposure to these chemicals, to make 
sure that we don't end up with a new set of problems and really 
challenge industry to make sure that if there is a toxic 
chemical that cannot be replaced with another, that the 
protections for workers and neighbors are gold standard EPA.
    I'm happy that President Biden has continued his commitment 
to science and manufacturing, as reflected in his Fiscal Year 
budget request for NIST. I look forward to hearing your 
testimony today to learn about how we can tackle some of the 
major challenges that we face and also to ensure U.S. 
competitiveness in advanced industries.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Lofgren follows:]

    Thank you, Chairman Lucas, for holding today's hearing. I 
would also like to welcome our distinguished witness, the 
Honorable Dr. Laurie Locascio.
    The National Institute of Standards and Technology is a 
small agency in the Department of Commerce that plays a large 
role promoting U.S. innovation and competitiveness by advancing 
measurement science, standards, and technology. NIST does 
critical work across every sector of our economy. The agency 
supports small manufacturers and our domestic supply chains. 
NIST is critical to the creation of engineering standards and 
building codes that make our buildings safe. And NIST develops 
the cybersecurity guidance that Federal agencies and businesses 
alike use to protect Americans' information.
    Congress and industry alike are asking NIST to take on more 
such responsibilities even as the agency faces a crisis of 
failing infrastructure and unmet maintenance needs. A report by 
the National Academies from February of this year found that 
deficiencies in NIST's facilities ``constitute a major threat 
to its mission performance and thereby, to our nation's 
economy, national security, and quality of life.'' Leaking 
roofs and exploding pipes have ruined millions of dollars worth 
of equipment. Poor ventilation systems have made it impossible 
for NIST to conduct certain critical experiments. Routine 
requests for maintenance are often deferred for months or 
years.
    This is a problem decades in the making and it will require 
sustained support from Congress to overcome. I am encouraged 
that the President's budget request would double NIST's 
construction funding. It is essential that Congress follows 
through with funding, and that NIST continues to provide timely 
updates to us on the state of its facilities.
    NIST does so much important work across all sectors. Let me 
just say a few words about two particular technology areas. 
NIST is leading the way on standards and frameworks for safe 
and trustworthy AI systems. Earlier this year, in response to a 
requirement developed by this Committee as part of the National 
AI Initiative Act, the agency published a voluntary AI risk 
management framework to help organizations think through and 
mitigate the risks in their AI systems. This framework has been 
lauded by the greater technology community, even though NIST 
led it with limited resources and only a handful of staff.
    Voluntary standards are critical to ensuring that both 
public and private sector organizations can test, evaluate, and 
take steps to mitigate the risks associated with AI. I look 
forward to a discussion about progress in developing standards 
and testing capabilities for AI. At the same time, AI 
technology is moving so fast that I worry voluntary guardrails 
will be too little too late. I recognize that NIST is not a 
regulatory agency so there are limits to the discussion we can 
have in this context, but we can still look to NIST for their 
deep technical expertise in informing our debates about policy.
    Finally, NIST is the also the agency responsible for much 
of the CHIPS for America program that Congress passed last year 
to revitalize American-made semiconductor manufacturing. I know 
Members will have many questions about CHIPS implementation and 
where things stand. I look forward to learning more today.
    Dr. Locascio, I am very happy with President Biden's 
continued commitment to science and American manufacturing as 
reflected in the fiscal year 2024 budget request for NIST. I 
look forward to your testimony today to learn about how we can 
tackle some of these major challenges and ensure U.S. 
competitiveness in advanced industries.
    Thank you and I yield back.

    Chairman Lucas. The Chair thanks the gentlelady for her 
thoughtful observations as always.
    Let me introduce our witness today. Our witness today is 
the--Dr.--Hon. Dr. Laurie Locascio, Under Secretary of Commerce 
for Standards and Technology, Director of the National 
Institute of Standards and Technology. She oversees NIST's 
collaborative efforts with industry, academia, and other 
government agencies to develop and apply the technology, 
measurements, and standards needed for innovative products and 
services.
    Dr. Locascio most recently served as Vice President for 
Research at the University of Maryland, College Park, and the 
University of Maryland, Baltimore. Prior to joining the 
University of Maryland, the doctor worked at NIST for 31 years, 
rising from a research biomedical engineer to eventually 
leading the agency's material measurements laboratory. She also 
served as an Acting Associate Director for Laboratory Programs, 
providing direction and operational guidance for NIST's lab 
research programs. Dr. Locascio has a B.S. in chemistry from 
James Madison University, an M.S. in bioengineering from the 
University of Utah, and a Ph.D. in toxicology from the 
University of Maryland, Baltimore.
    I recognize Dr. Locascio for 5 minutes to present her 
testimony.

         TESTIMONY OF DR. LAURIE E. LOCASCIO, DIRECTOR,

         NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY

    Dr. Locascio. Chair Lucas, Ranking Member Lofgren, and 
Members of the Committee, I'm Laurie Locascio, Under Secretary 
of Commerce for Standards and Technology, and the Director of 
the National Institute of Standards and Technology or NIST. 
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to 
discuss the President's Fiscal Year 2024 budget request for 
NIST.
    The President's budget request positions NIST to revitalize 
U.S. manufacturing across multiple sectors and in all States, 
fuel the innovation economy through investments in critical and 
emerging technologies, and assert NIST's premier position as 
the national metrology institute in the world, helping our 
industries to compete and thrive in the global economy.
    The President's budget request, approximately $1.6 billion 
for NIST in FY '24, this will allow NIST to advance U.S. 
innovation and industrial competitiveness, as is our mission. 
Importantly, the budget requests critical new resources that 
are essential to address the serious deterioration of NIST's 
70-year-old facilities and to ensure that we will be able to 
continue to carry out our mission and conduct our world-class 
research.
    The FY '24 budget requests $995 million for scientific and 
technical research services account, and that includes $68.7 
million in new research program investments. This budget will 
ensure that NIST remains in a strong leadership position for 
delivering the measurements and the standards necessary for the 
development and use of critical and emerging technologies like 
AI and quantum and biotechnology. It is essential that we 
remain in a strong leadership position as these technologies 
are major drivers of economic growth.
    The budget will expand NIST's efforts to further the 
development of trustworthy AI systems. Building off NIST's 
successful AI Risk Management Framework, the budget will 
provide new resources to expand the capabilities for 
benchmarking and evaluation of AI systems to ensure that the 
U.S. can lead in AI innovation, while ensuring that we 
responsibly address the risks of this rapidly developing 
technology.
    The budget will also expand NIST's ability to address 
emergent cybersecurity issues and efforts in cybersecurity 
education and workforce development.
    The budget request will also allow NIST to make critical 
investments to strengthen NIST's core mission delivery, and 
that includes new investments to accelerate the rapid 
deployment of critical reference materials to support the 
bioeconomy and food safety, as well as dedicated funding to 
more efficiently execute NIST's responsibilities for building 
failure investigations.
    The FY '24 request includes $262.1 million for 
construction. On both campuses, NIST's facilities are degrading 
rapidly. NIST contracted with the National Academies of 
Science, Engineering, and Medicine to assess our facilities, 
and their report, published early this year, describes a dire 
situation, quote, ``that facilities issues are preventing NIST 
from achieving its mission, and that in many cases NIST 
facilities are no longer world class,'' end quote. Now, for 
NIST to continue leading the world in measurements and 
standards and to continue having the most talented staff to 
carry out its many activities that ensure U.S. economic growth 
and national security, we must address the condition of our 
facilities through sustained investment.
    The FY '24 budget request includes $374.9 million for 
Industrial Technology Services. This is an increase of $161.2 
million to ensure that the Manufacturing Extension Partnership 
Program and Manufacturing USA can address the most pressing 
challenges facing our Nation's manufacturing ecosystem. This 
increase would allow MEP to narrow the workforce gap, mitigate 
supply chain vulnerabilities, and leverage advanced 
technologies for manufacturers. The Manufacturing USA funds 
will allow for the creation and operation of testbeds at 
existing institute and support engagement of underserved 
communities in the network's technology workforce development 
programs.
    So I'm proud of the work that NIST does and truly, truly 
honored to lead professionals that work at NIST. Their efforts, 
aligned with the President's budget, will allow NIST to have 
continued impact on advancing the frontiers of critical 
technologies that will accelerate and drive future innovation 
and increase the competitiveness of U.S. industry. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Locascio follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    
    
    
    Chairman Lucas. Thank you, Dr. Locascio, for your 
testimony. I want to recognize myself for 5 minutes for 
questions.
    Dr. Locascio, in January, the Chairman of the Government 
Oversight Committee, James Comer, and I sent a letter to the 
White House raising concerns about the discrepancies between 
the White House's blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights and NIST's 
AI Risk Management Framework. In response to the letter, the 
White House stated that NIST staff also provided input into 
OSTP's (Office of Science and Technology Policy's) development 
of the blueprint. To what extent did OSTP consult NIST about 
the blueprint? And did you express concerns about the 
inconsistencies between the two documents?
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you for that question, Chairman. So we 
were involved in the AI blueprint out of the OSTP. We had many 
discussions all along the way about the compatibility of the 
two documents. And we have made a crosswalk that you can see on 
our website that shows the compatibility of the two documents.
    I will say that they are both geared toward responsible AI. 
The NIST document very clearly is looking toward measurements 
and standards and solutions for AI risk management, allowing 
people to really evaluate their risk associated with the use of 
AI. And so that document is, I think, a very different document 
than the AI blueprint, but there is compatibility, and I'm 
happy to send you our crosswalk on that.
    Chairman Lucas. On Friday, the Administration announced new 
actions to promote responsible AI innovation that protects 
Americans' rights and safety. Specifically, it stated that the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will be releasing draft 
policy guidance on the use of AI systems by the U.S. 
Government. Given the technical expertise at NIST, will NIST be 
involved in the process of developing this guidance?
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, we will. They've already reached out to 
us, and we will be involved in that.
    Chairman Lucas. Is OMB looking to utilize the AI Risk 
Management Framework?
    Dr. Locascio. I am not sure the answer to that question, 
but we have worked across the Administration, and the 
Administration is very supportive of the AI RMF, and so it 
definitely will come into the conversation.
    Chairman Lucas. Doctor, moving to the CHIPS program, the 
first Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for the incentive 
program to build semiconductor fabrication facilities was 
released in March. There were several non-statutory policies 
included in the notice, including a requirement that any entity 
that receives an award will have to provide childcare for 
everyone involved in the construction and operation of a new 
facility. One of the goals of the CHIPS program is to offset 
the fact that building and running fabs in the U.S. is more 
expensive than in Asia. This requirement seems likely that it 
will only increase the cost of the project. Will the 
construction and operation of new childcare facilities be 
considered an eligible use of the CHIPS and Science funds?
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you for that question. The CHIPS funds 
are to be used to create new manufacturing fabrication 
facilities in this country. And our goal, according to the law, 
is really to make sure that happens and that we have the 
appropriate workforce to support that. So the money will be 
used to bring back manufacturing to the United States 
holistically. And yes, the money will focus on fabrication 
facilities for leading-edge, mature node, and current 
generation semiconductor fabrication.
    Chairman Lucas. To take this question one step farther, has 
the Department solicited an independent cost-benefit or needs 
analysis of making CHIPS award funding available for childcare 
facilities?
    Dr. Locascio. No, we have not.
    Chairman Lucas. So then it's hard to say what we would 
expect the return on that investment to be.
    Dr. Locascio. But the money--excuse me. May I respond?
    Chairman Lucas. Please.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you. And I appreciate the question. We 
are focused on the success of CHIPS for this country and 
bringing back manufacturing. That is our sole focus, to make 
sure that we accomplish everything that you wanted us to 
accomplish in that bill, which is to ensure that manufacturing 
comes back to the United States, and we are wholly competitive 
that way.
    Chairman Lucas. I appreciate that very much, Director. And 
I would just simply note, if all of these incidental issues 
were going to be added in then, that funding should have been 
discussed when the bill was put together. But we'll talk about 
that later, I'm sure.
    With that, I yield back the balance of my time and turn to 
the Ranking Member for 5 minutes of questions.
    Ms. Lofgren. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Part of this challenge we face in implementing CHIPS and 
Science is workforce. And my reaction when I saw the childcare 
incentive--not requirement--was that that was to address 
workforce. I mean, you--if fab workers don't have the capacity 
for their--for childcare, they can't come to work. And we're 
already seeing that throughout Silicon Valley. But that doesn't 
address some other issues relative to the higher-end Ph.D.'s. I 
mean, Intel said they needed 1,000 Ph.D.'s for their company 
alone. I don't know if you've done an assessment of how we are 
going to meet the workforce needs that would be essential to 
make CHIPS and Science actually work.
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, thank you for that question. We have 
done quite a lot of work in assessing the workforce needs, 
working with many associations who have put together their 
discussions about what the workforce needs are going to be. 
Some of the estimates based on the success of the 
implementation of the CHIPS Act are that there will be 180,000 
new jobs created in this country. That's quite a bit of demand, 
and we have to fill that gap. And so there are a number of ways 
we're thinking about approaching that.
    Ms. Lofgren. Let me ask you about another potential 
incentive. I mentioned in my opening statement the issue of 
toxics in the production of chips. At one time in Silicon 
Valley, there was a huge problem. There were cancer spirals 
around some fabs, miscarriages that were clearly related to 
exposures, as well as children who had deformities related to 
the exposure. There's been improvement, tremendous improvement 
since that time, but there are still a very dangerous toxics. 
In some cases, they can't be replaced in the production. And I 
want to know and hear from you publicly whether you're in a 
position to incent industry to address that issue successfully, 
if there's a toxic that cannot be replaced, that we work with, 
hopefully, the EPA to make sure that exposure is precluded, not 
just for the workforce, but also for the surrounding community. 
Would you intend to work with EPA on that?
    Dr. Locascio. So I just wanted to say--first of all, thank 
you for that question--and that is there are in the original 
NOFO, in the first NOFO that came out on February 28, there are 
requirements for complying with OSHA (Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration). We also--as NIST, work very closely 
with our regulators in producing the standards that are 
required for any new measurement that they need in the field 
regarding toxic exposures and so, for instance, we are working 
right now on the development of standards to measure PFAS----
    Ms. Lofgren. If I could interrupt, the OSHA Director 
himself said that their standards were insufficient, so I'm 
hoping that we can reach out to EPA for the gold standard on 
some of these chemicals.
    Dr. Locascio. We'd be happy to talk more about that, follow 
up with you.
    Ms. Lofgren. Finally, I want to talk about Standards-
Essential Patents (SEP). You know, this is a very important 
provision. Patent holders participate in standardization. They 
declare their patents essential, but they have to voluntarily 
commit to licensing their patents on fair, reasonable, and 
nondiscriminatory terms. This is really essential for the 
development of industry in the United States. I'm happy that 
NIST has moved to retract what I thought was a misguided 2019 
SEP licensing policy statement, but I think there might be more 
work to do to push back on SEP licensing abuse. Are you 
planning a further action to make sure that the United States' 
policy is to ensure a balanced approach to SEPs and licensing 
to reward innovative ideas?
    Dr. Locascio. So thank you for that question. Yes, we 
believe in a balanced approach. And with the withdrawal--I've 
worked very closely with Kathi Vidal over at USPTO on the 
withdrawal, and of course with DOJ (Department of Justice). And 
we are continuing to have constant communications around SEP 
licensing and how important that is for our innovation 
ecosystem. So yes.
    Ms. Lofgren. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I see my time 
has expired, so I yield back.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Florida, Mr. 
Posey, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Posey. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Dr. Locascino, do you concur with the National Security 
Agency that the Chinese Communist Party is co-opting 
international standards?
    Dr. Locascio. Well, I appreciate that question. I've paid a 
lot of attention to this issue. And China is present much more 
prominently in the international standards organizations at 
this particular time, and they have really laid down the 
gauntlet when they set forth their China Standards 2035 
strategy a few years ago that really says their intent is to be 
the global gold standard, right, usurping other nations.
    So with that intent in mind, they have increased 
participation. We still have more leadership positions than 
China, but they now have more participants in many different 
fora. I will say that, internationally, with our likeminded 
partners and allies, we have many more leadership positions 
than China does on the international standards stage. That's 
not to say it's not something that we can't worry about. It's 
time to do something, and that's why the national standards 
strategy that was released for critical and emerging 
technologies that was released last week, I think, is so 
vitally important. We have to be strategic in how we are 
dealing with international standards. It's absolutely 
essential.
    Mr. Posey. Thank you. Does the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology track and respond to the Chinese 
Communist Party generated standards that become globally 
adopted?
    Dr. Locascio. We do not track that, but I'm happy to 
discuss that as a follow-on if you'd like.
    Mr. Posey. OK.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Posey. Would you explain the use--or explain to us the 
dangers of allowing the Chinese Communist Party to outpace the 
United States' development of standards for artificial 
intelligence?
    Dr. Locascio. I think that is an excellent question, and it 
is truly existential when you think about who is going to be 
the leader in creating the next standards on the world stage 
for AI. I mean, do we want autocratic societies to be 
instilling their values in what is the global gold standard in 
AI? I don't think so. I think we want the United States and 
likeminded partners to take a leadership role in making sure 
that our values are instilled in AI global standards so that 
they represent responsible use of AI and consideration of all 
the risks.
    Mr. Posey. Yeah, and you wonder who you can trust. And, you 
know, is their AI smarter than our AI domestically, 
politically, militarily?
    How is China's State-led approach to technology development 
challenging the rules, norms, and approaches that the United 
States and international standards bodies take with regard to 
standards development?
    Dr. Locascio. Well, so one of the things that this new 
national strategy that was released is really going to have an 
impact in is coming together with likeminded partners and 
allies to make sure that the rules remain the same, that we 
continue to have fair and open and transparent processes, that 
the governance is retained, which has allowed us to have an 
incredible and productive international standards arena for 
decades and decades that have really benefited American 
markets. So our goal moving forward is to make sure that does 
not change, that we still are able to operate the way we've 
continued for decades, fairly, responsibly, and openly.
    Mr. Posey. Yeah. What is your agency's perspective on 
China's use of standards as a tool for protection, technology 
transfer, and a mechanism for restricting market access?
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you for that question. And I think as 
long as they are still present in the international standards, 
arenas and bodies, coming together to negotiate on 
international standards, they will not be building barriers to 
international trade. It is really important, though, that in 
standard-setting bodies we have an open and fair playing field 
so that we can come together and negotiate in the best possible 
technical standards for the world win. And if that's true and 
they're there as part of the negotiation, then that does not 
become a technical barrier to trade. However, if they become 
more isolated and mostly adopt internal standards and do not 
any longer participate in international standard-setting 
processes, then we have the threat of really bifurcating the 
world and having more technical barriers to trade.
    Mr. Posey. Thank you. I see my time has expired. Mr. 
Chairman, I yield back. Thank you.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentleman yields back.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Chairman Lucas. The Chair now recognizes gentlelady from 
Oregon, Ms. Bonamici, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. Welcome to the Committee, Dr. 
Locascio.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Ms. Bonamici. Good to see you. The National Institute of 
Standards and Technology, NIST, launched the Manufacturing 
Extension Partnership program back in the late 1980's to 
support small and midsized manufacturers in declining 
industries. The Oregon Manufacturing Extension Partnership, or 
OMEP, serves Oregon manufacturers statewide and helps them 
compete globally by creating and implementing business 
strategies, increasing operational efficiencies, and solving 
workforce challenges. We appreciate OMEP.
    So NIST's FY '24 budget includes an increase of a little 
more than $100 million for the Hollings Manufacturing Extension 
Partnership to make progress on three specific goals, narrowing 
the workforce gap, mitigating supply chain vulnerabilities, and 
leveraging technology. So how will their impro--the proposed 
increase in addressing these interconnected challenges benefit 
Oregon and OMEP? And how will this investment strengthen U.S. 
manufacturing across the country?
    Dr. Locascio. Well, thank you for that question, and I 
appreciate your support of MEP. We think it's a very 
influential and exciting program, and we're excited about the 
future of it as well. I think during the COVID pandemic, one of 
the things that we really emphasize is the ability to pivot and 
develop new technologies when there is a national emergency. 
That was, I think, a really exciting thing that happened during 
COVID with the MEP, but also this idea of this supply chain 
connectedness, right, starting to really understand what supply 
chains are, what the vulnerabilities are. To us, moving forward 
with this new budget, we will work more closely with the MEP 
centers on sussing out and understanding the supply chain and 
the supply chain vulnerabilities regionally, but connect that 
through the network so we know what we have----
    Ms. Bonamici. OK.
    Dr. Locascio [continuing]. At stake nationwide and how 
somebody in Oregon can help out somebody in Virginia to 
essentially meet their needs.
    Ms. Bonamici. OK. Thank you. Moving on to CHIPS and 
Science, which I'm very excited about, the legislation 
appropriates $11 billion for semiconductor research and 
development to carry out several activities, including the 
National Semiconductor Technology Center, the NSTC, to conduct 
research, prototyping, and scaling of advanced semiconductor 
technology. My home State of Oregon is home to a thriving 
semiconductor industry. We have many of the world's leading 
semiconductor manufacturers, suppliers, and researchers 
operating in the State, as well as a robust semiconductor 
workforce, making it an ideal location for the NSTC 
headquarters or an institute, such as one, for example, focused 
on advanced lithography. So what process--what will the process 
look like to select the headquarters and site the network of 
institutes? Will the NSTC issue RFPs (request for proposals) 
for each, and what role will NIST have in that process? And if 
you could also address with Oregon skilled workforce, advanced 
and innovative technology, and sincere commitment to the 
semiconductor industry, do you agree that Oregon should be a 
frontrunner in the designation of the headquarters or a core 
technical center?
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you for that question. We are very 
excited about the NSTC, and we are anticipating that it will be 
a nationwide resource and really promoting innovation in 
microelectronics for years and decades to come, and that's 
really what we need to accomplish here. So the NSTC, we put out 
a vision and white paper last week, and essentially, we are 
right now calling for nominations for people who will 
participate in a selection committee that will establish the 
board. The board will then set up the operation for the NSTC.
    Now, we are not going to be involved in site selection 
necessarily, but our goal is to have a successful, independent, 
purpose-built NSTC, and it will take advantage of assets, the 
most important assets that we have around the country and be 
able to link them together.
    Ms. Bonamici. Tremendous potential.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Ms. Bonamici. So your budget includes an additional $20 
million for cybersecurity, no doubt important, but only an 
additional $5 million for AI, which is within another 
technology group. So in light of the recent revelations and 
conversations and alarm bells in the industry, what message 
does that send?
    Dr. Locascio. Well, I appreciate that question as well. Our 
AI resources are going to be very, very tightly focused on 
several things, one, advancing the AI RMF, which has been 
already adopted by industry. As we discussed, we had an open 
and transparent process, collective feedback from so many 
people as we were developing it, and that really transitioned 
it nicely into being adopted, which is fantastic.
    There is a lot of conversation about generative AI right 
now, obviously, that's what everybody's discussing. Our goal in 
the coming year with this funding is to focus the AI RMF and 
look specifically at the risks associated with generative AI, 
working with the community. We'd also like to develop a public 
working group who can provide input and also provide feedback 
on the risks associated with generative AI, but we will be 
working very, very closely with the community specifically 
focusing this fund----
    Ms. Bonamici. I see my time has expired.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Ms. Bonamici. I yield back.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentlelady's time has expired.
    The gentleman now--or the Chairman now recognizes the 
gentleman from Texas, Dr. Babin, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Babin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Dr. 
Locascio, for being here.
    NIST carries out research and development to enhance the 
resilience of buildings and infrastructure to natural hazards, 
including earthquakes. We don't have many of those in Texas, 
but a lot of wind, a lot of hurricanes, fires, and others. NIST 
also deployed teams to study the aftermath of a disaster to 
improve these standards, codes, and practices for buildings and 
infrastructure. Does the President's budget request include 
funding for these activities?
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, thank you for that question. The 
President's budget request does include additional support to 
support our investigations of disasters, and it's critically 
important for us to get the funding because, as we do these 
investigations, they really do translate, as you mentioned, 
into building codes and standards that will safeguard people 
for years to come, right, really change the way we approach our 
building in disaster-prone areas and really all over the 
country and the world.
    Mr. Babin. Right.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Babin. Thank you. In Fiscal Year '23 omnibus, NIST 
receive $40 million in no-year supplemental disaster relief 
funds to investigate the impacts of hurricanes, typhoons, and 
wildfires in calendar year 2022 to support the development of 
resilient standards--along with the first question--in regard 
to weather and climate disasters, in addition to the underlying 
research to support these standards and for necessary expenses 
to carry out investigations of building failures pursuant to 
the National Construction Safety Team Act of 2002. Has NIST 
awarded any of these funds, and if so, can you tell me what 
they were awarded for?
    Dr. Locascio. I could give you a very detailed breakdown of 
what we have done so far with those funds, and I'd be happy to 
follow up with you on that. But we are using those to continue 
the investigation in Surfside and--related to Hurricane Ian, 
Hurricane Maria, and others, and yes, we are using those funds 
and they are being expended, but I'd be happy to get a detailed 
report on that back to you.
    Mr. Babin. OK. Thank you.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Babin. Earlier this year, NIST released the Artificial 
Intelligence Risk Management Framework, RMF, a voluntary 
framework to guide organizations and incorporating 
trustworthiness into the design, development, and deployment of 
AI systems. The Committee is aware that NIST is expanding upon 
the AI RMF by creating industry profiles that contain 
actionable guidance for implementing this safe AI for specific 
use cases. How will NIST ensure these efforts to advance 
trustworthy AI are deployed into real-world use by 
stakeholders?
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you for that question. The AI RMF is 
really an important document put out by NIST developed to 
promote trustworthy AI exactly for that purpose. It is pro-
innovation, and it is also promoting responsible use of AI. And 
it has been developed in concert with stakeholders very closely 
so that the end result is a product that is usable by them as 
they're developing AI, and as they are thinking about promoting 
or incorporating AI solutions into their current business 
practices. So we're developing a resource center for them to 
understand how to use it. We're working with the community and 
developing use cases. So there's a lot going on right now in 
terms of how we are supporting AI and promoting the use of the 
AI RMF. Thank you for that question.
    Mr. Babin. OK. I want to jump over to quantum research now. 
NIST's budget request includes $220 million for laboratory 
programs on fundamental measurement, quantum science, and 
measurement dissemination research. NIST is a leader in quantum 
research. Can you talk a little bit about NIST's role in 
carrying out the National Quantum Initiative? And can you point 
toward specific outcomes over the last 5 years that have 
advanced U.S. leadership in quantum science? And then, finally, 
how much does NIST plan to spend on fundamental measurement 
quantum science and measurement dissemination this year? If you 
would answer the first question first.
    Dr. Locascio. Sure. So, NIST has been involved in quantum 
science for decades, and we have four Nobel prizes that are 
awarded to our scientists who have been working in this field. 
We do research to standards development, to tech transfer, to 
technology development, and now with the National Quantum 
Initiative, we have developed the Quantum Economic Development 
Consortium, which brings together these nascent industries, 
thinking about how to translate this into our economy for the 
benefit of the new quantum economy in the United States. So our 
work is really complete along that entire trajectory. You have 
an exciting new technology, and how you're going to cement it 
in the United States for the benefit of the U.S.
    Mr. Babin. I'm out of time, Mr. Chairman, so I will yield 
back. Thank you.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from North 
Carolina, Ms. Ross, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Ross. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to 
you and Ranking Member Lofgren for holding this hearing to 
discuss the importance of NIST funding and the agency's ongoing 
work.
    Just this week, NIST awarded a grant to NC State University 
in my district to support the North Carolina Manufacturing 
Extension Partnership's National Supply Chain Optimization and 
Intelligence Network Program, which will improve the resiliency 
and optimization for domestic supply chains in my home State 
and across the country, so thank you for that. And I'm excited 
to follow the work on this project at NC State and everything 
NIST does, and I look forward to hearing even more from you, 
Dr. Locascio. You've done such a wonderful job responding to so 
many questions.
    I'm going to shift the conversation to cybersecurity. The 
work NIST does regarding cybersecurity standards and best 
practices is incredibly valuable to organizations across the 
globe. The NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) is widely 
adopted, so much so that some companies use it as their 
domestic cybersecurity standard and baseline. NIST is in the 
process of updating the Cybersecurity Framework. Can you 
discuss the process and what is being updated?
    Dr. Locascio. Oh, yes, I really do appreciate that 
question. We began the update process last year with our first 
kickoff meeting, and we had 7,000 people sign up for that, a 
huge reception, 100 different countries. So I think that really 
indicates that people are very interested in how we can develop 
this update to the framework, how well it's adopted not only 
nationally, but also how it's received internationally, and how 
it can really underpin global standards as they develop. So are 
likeminded partners and allies are very excited about it as 
well.
    The biggest change is really a piece around governance and 
how people manage and govern processes around cybersecurity 
within their organizations, and we think it's a really 
important update. We've gotten a lot of feedback from many 
different sectors, including universities, like we just 
mentioned at the beginning, and so we're really anticipating a 
lot of input also from small businesses on this particular 
draft, so we're looking forward to that. Thank you for the 
question.
    Ms. Ross. Well, just as a follow up, how does NIST help 
with the implementation? And you raised the question about 
small businesses. Small businesses don't have a cybersecurity 
person on their payroll who has expertise. How do you help 
people who might not have that internal expertise?
    Dr. Locascio. Yeah, I really appreciate that question. It's 
one of the questions that we got very early on, how are small 
businesses really going to be able to use this, and so we spent 
a lot of time developing resources for small business. We have 
a small business community of interest. We have a small 
business corner that people can go and just sort of see how 
other small businesses have used it, but our goal is to really 
bring them together to help them understand how it can be 
implemented, and we do that virtually, but we also have a 
place, the National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence, where 
they can come and work with us and figure out the best-use 
cases and solutions that are appropriate for small businesses.
    Ms. Ross. Great. And I know that the President's budget 
requests asked for an additional $20 million to support privacy 
and cybersecurity work. Can you tell us how you might use that 
money?
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, so part of it will be used for improving 
cybersecurity--improving the Cybersecurity Framework, the next 
edition. We're also working on updating and working on 
dissemination of the privacy framework, which is another very 
key portion of NIST work, which promotes privacy and in concert 
with the Cybersecurity Framework. So our work moving forward 
will be to disseminate these two products and also to do more 
deep technical research and understanding where there are 
issues that are difficult to solve with relation to privacy and 
cybersecurity.
    Ms. Ross. Thanks. With the few seconds I have left, I've 
done a lot of work to promote a pipeline of our next 
cybersecurity workers, and can you tell us more about the 
nature of NIST's K through 12 outreach and describe how you're 
helping design experiences that will help our students engage 
in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) and 
be lifelong learners?
    Dr. Locascio. I appreciate that. And I missed talking about 
the workforce development that's going to be happening with the 
new cybersecurity funding in FY '24, it's a really important 
part of the component. The whole research that we do in 
development at NIST is to engage the next generation of cyber 
workforce, so we are also working to develop many different 
ways to outreach to K through 12, and, in general, working on 
trying to figure out how to bring new and diverse populations 
into the cyber workforce.
    Ms. Ross. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Baird [presiding]. Thank you. And the lady yields back. 
And the Chairman had other responsibilities, so he's going to 
let me--you got me now.
    I really appreciate your testimony, and I really appreciate 
your experience and background. The fact that you have--I was 
looking at your bio. You have 115 scientific papers, and you've 
got 12 patents in the fields of bioengineering, as well as 
analytical chemistry, so I give you great credit for that.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Baird. So that leads to my question. My first question 
is that, you know, lately with platforms such as ChatGPT, 
there's a majority--or a major concern with intellectual 
property rights regarding where the information is gathered 
from and also concerns about how accurate the information is. 
So I guess I'd like to--or we would like to have your thoughts 
about how accurate that information is, and then intellectual 
property rights.
    Dr. Locascio. So you're talking specifically around how 
accurate the information that you get out of ChatGPT or----
    Mr. Baird. Yes, or anything else you think is important. 
You're the one with all the degrees, so----
    Dr. Locascio. I can't really speak to that, but I 
appreciate the question as far as the accuracy of the platform. 
One of the things that we think about at NIST is how to make 
sure that the data that we provide is accurate and can be cited 
accurately. I know there are a lot of discussions around how to 
input accurate data into those types of models, and NIST spends 
a lot of time thinking about data sets that can be used to 
train AI models, but we're not specifically involved in 
ChatGPT, and I really can't speak to the accuracy of the 
information that you get out of ChatGPT. I can speak to the 
accuracy of the data that would be available to be pulled into 
any platform.
    Mr. Baird. Well, the way I understand it, the ChatGT--or 
GPT actually uses AI to interact with----
    Dr. Locascio. Right.
    Mr. Baird [continuing]. You with questions and give you 
good answers supposedly. But anyway, I appreciate your 
perspective on that.
    You know, the other area, I'm really interested in this 
chips program and the CHIPS and Science Act that authorized 
NIST to develop three new manufacturing institutes that were 
focused on semiconductors and manufacturing. The bill provided 
$100 million in Fiscal Year '22, 47 in '23, and 118 in '24, and 
mandatory funds to establish these one or more institutes. 
Could you give us some kind of an idea and provide us any 
updates on the plans and development of these institutes, as 
well as do you have any timeline for when we can be putting out 
a request for proposals?
    Dr. Locascio. Yeah, I really appreciate that question. So 
the research and development piece of the CHIPS R&D has four 
different components, and we are working very hard to make sure 
that these are all aligned and can work seamlessly with each 
other. So what we have been doing for the past 6 months is 
really planning the phased approach of how we are going to 
initiate the NSTC, the packaging program, the Manufacturing USA 
Institute and the NIST metrology program. So we want to make 
sure they're linked and that industries can enter each one of 
those seamlessly and know how to access all the resources that 
we have within the CHIPS R&D program.
    With regard to your specific question on when you will see 
requests for proposals, that will be coming later this year.
    Mr. Baird. Well, I appreciate that, and I'm really glad 
that we're--you know, I want to make sure that our chips 
program is ahead of China or any other adversary we might have, 
and so I appreciate having the talent you have and having NIST 
working on that. I think it's extremely important.
    And so the other question I had relates to my colleagues 
across the aisle keep a provision in the CHIPS and Science Act 
that would further Congress' effort to strengthen our research 
security at our Nation's academic research institutions. I 
think that's a pretty important idea. This provision gives 
universities the tools they need to protect sensitive research 
from cyber theft by requiring NIST to assist research-intensive 
universities in adopting the Cybersecurity Framework to help 
mitigate cybersecurity risks related to conducting research. 
And so we've got about 17 seconds for you to tell me an update 
on that idea.
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, so we are working with universities. 
Right now, we have a section on our website that talks 
specifically under the CSF how they can implement, and we have 
a request for information out to universities to find out how 
best to support them. But I came from a university, and I was 
involved in the research security--actually, I was leading the 
research security efforts, so I understand the importance of 
reaching out to our universities.
    Mr. Baird. Absolutely, and thank you for that answer. And 
so----
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Baird [continuing]. I yield back to myself, I guess.
    And so who's up next? Mr. Sorensen from Illinois.
    Mr. Sorensen. Thank you to the Chairman and Ranking Member 
for convening this hearing and Dr. Locascio for your 
willingness to appear today, and thank you for the hard work 
that is not always recognized.
    Last month, this Committee passed the TRANQ Research Act, 
which requires the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology, NIST, to support research to identify xylazine, 
synthetic opioids, and other dangerous subjects of concern; on 
the other hand, NIST, through the Science and Technical 
Research and Services Program, tasked with studying the impacts 
of hurricanes, typhoons, wildfires to support the development 
of climate-resilient standards.
    Before coming to Congress, I served my district for nearly 
20 years as a meteorologist, and my job was to present 
meteorology in an accurate and digestible manner so that my 
community could make good decisions to protect their property 
and the lives of families. NIST promotes resilient standards so 
these communities can better prepare themselves and their 
infrastructure for disasters such as flooding, that we along 
the Mississippi River in western Illinois are just getting 
through here today.
    We've seen some of the costs of disasters in our Nation 
happened just in the past few years. For example, in 2020, the 
Iowa and Illinois derecho left $11.5 billion worth of damage in 
its wake. How can Congress assist NIST in ensuring that the 
codes and the standards that the agency helps to develop are 
implemented in such a way that they'll result in future 
disasters being less costly?
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, I appreciate that question, and it is 
really devastating what we're seeing all over the country, and 
we've been asked to participate in many more investigations 
than we ever have. Clearly, it's important, and that's why it's 
part of this budget. The way that we do our work is to make 
sure that whatever we do is an answer that's appropriate for 
any changes that could be necessary in order to make a rebuilt 
community more disaster resilient or to shore up codes so that 
people can become disaster resilient in an existing building. 
And so really, the quality of the data and the information that 
we provide not only feeds into codes and international 
standards but also gets adopted. And the way it gets adopted is 
that we work very closely regionally and nationally and 
internationally to assure that these are built into the next 
generation of infrastructure.
    Mr. Sorensen. Because we also have to understand that the 
weather that we're seeing today, the extreme weather today is a 
product of the warming up to yesterday. So understanding as 
this continues to worsen, we're going to have bigger disasters 
in the future.
    How does NIST coordinate with the Department of Ag to 
prepare our agriculture, our farmers with the next disaster?
    Dr. Locascio. I think that's a very good question, and I 
would say we don't coordinate necessarily to prepare them for 
disasters. Our response is to find out what could happen and 
how we can shore up infrastructure, and that in general 
supports the farmers. But we do work with the Department of 
Agriculture, but I'm not being able to come up with the best 
way that we coordinate with them, and I would love to get back 
to you on that if that's OK.
    Mr. Sorensen. We can follow up on that, surely.
    Dr. Locascio. That would be great.
    Mr. Sorensen. On a related note, NIST has an online 
economic decision tool to help communities plan for disasters. 
The tool helps communities plan infrastructure investments----
    Dr. Locascio. Right, right.
    Mr. Sorensen [continuing]. Based on accurate----
    Dr. Locascio. Right.
    Mr. Sorensen [continuing]. Data. How can we work and live 
with these disasters in the future? And does NIST have any 
plans to expand on this resilience tool in the 2024 budget, for 
instance?
    Dr. Locascio. So we don't have specific funds for that 
particular tool in the 2024 budget. Most of the funding that we 
are using in the 2024 budget is to really shore up our ability 
to do disaster investigations and the supporting research to 
surround investigations and the conclusions from 
investigations, but we do have an ongoing commitment to making 
sure that community resilience tool is up to date, and we work 
with the communities to make sure that it meets their needs in 
how it's implemented.
    Mr. Sorensen. And I see my time is up, so I yield back.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Sorensen. Thank you.
    Mr. Baird. The gentleman yields back. And next, we go to 
Alabama.
    Mr. Strong. Thank you, Chairman Baird, and thank you, Dr. 
Locascio, for sharing your expertise with us today.
    Dr. Locascio, China is leveraging its position to gain 
influence in the organizations that develop international 
telecommunication standards such as the Third Generation 
Partnership Project and the standards for 2035. How can the 
U.S. be more effective in countering increased Chinese 
engagement in the development of these international standards?
    Dr. Locascio. Sure. So thank you for that question, and I 
think one very clear win on the U.S. side and with likeminded 
partners was the election of Doreen Bogdan-Martin in ITU 
(International Telecommunications Union), and that, I think, 
has a tremendous impact globally. We all understand that IT 
runs very differently than other standards development 
organizations. It is country by country, and so, therefore, 
it's important that we have leadership there that can represent 
what America stands for.
    Mr. Strong. Thank you. How will NIST protect U.S. quantum 
leadership before international standards-setting bodies?
    Dr. Locascio. So that's a really interesting question 
because there are a number of activities right now happening 
within international standards bodies that are directed at 
quantum even before the quantum market really exists, and 
that's unusual for us, right? Typically, the market exists, and 
then the standards come. But we aren't at that place anymore. 
We're really at a place where we need to be proactive in 
critical and emerging technologies, make sure that we are at 
the table promoting U.S. innovation and our competitive 
technologies and bring them to the table in the international 
standards forum and represent leadership positions there as 
well.
    Mr. Strong. Thank you.
    Dr. Locascio. So NIST is really at the forefront of that.
    Mr. Strong. Thank you. Chairman Baird, I yield back.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Baird. The gentleman yields back.
    And next, we go to Representative Foushee from North 
Carolina.
    Mrs. Foushee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member 
Lofgren, for this convening, and Director Locascio for your 
testimony at today's hearing.
    As you know, NIST plays a critical role for my district, 
North Carolina's 4th, and last month, I was proud to join 
President Biden and Secretary Raimondo during their visit to 
Wolfspeed in Durham for the first stop of the Administration's 
Investing in America Tour. And thanks to President Biden's bold 
economic plan and Congress' historic investments in American 
advanced manufacturing, research, and innovation, I am proud 
that North Carolina and my district are serving at the 
forefront of strengthening our Nation's innovative edge and 
playing our role in the Made-in-America initiative.
    So, Dr. Locascio, there were several provisions in the 
CHIPS and Science Act designed to ensure that Americans of all 
backgrounds have the opportunity and access to participate and 
benefit from this landmark law in terms of both the business 
owners and the workforce. It is critical that we support 
minority-owned businesses, veteran-owned businesses, and women-
owned businesses in CHIPS-funded projects, and increase the 
participation of economically disadvantaged individuals in the 
semiconductor workforce.
    The CHIPS Program Office, according to the law, must assign 
personnel specifically to focus on opportunity and inclusion. 
Can you discuss how NIST is currently satisfying these 
requirements with its CHIPS for America programs?
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you for that question. Yes, we have 
already hired--as a matter of fact, several months ago hired--
it was one of our early hires, somebody who can focus directly 
on that issue, and she's our diversity and inclusion lead. And 
we are thinking about that really in every aspect of our 
program, not only as you mentioned, workforce development is 
critical. We want to make sure we don't miss anybody, and we 
bring them all into this semiconductor ecosystem that we're 
building for the United States, which is so exciting, but also 
build them into the R&D ecosystem, bring everyone into the R&D 
ecosystem and allow everyone to be successful as they launch 
their new companies, right, and venture. So I was an innovator 
who launched my own company, a woman-owned business, and so I 
really do want to see opportunities open for everyone to 
succeed. Thank you.
    Mrs. Foushee. And I was very happy to see the workforce 
development requirements in the program's first Notice of 
Funding Opportunity. The NOFO supports good job practices, 
expands childcare for companies seeking over $150 million in 
grant funding, and includes the use of union labor. Given that 
less than 1/4 of the semiconductor workforce are women, child 
support--childcare support, rather, should go a long way to 
attract more women in good-paying semiconductor jobs. Can you 
discuss the importance of supporting the human capital needed 
for our chips investments to succeed? And how is NIST thinking 
about supporting the microelectronics workforce in the United 
States?
    Dr. Locascio. Yes. So if you think about it--thank you for 
that question. If you think about it, it's pretty daunting, the 
amount of jobs that we're about to create with this funding, 
with this $50 billion plus the $2 billion from the 
microelectronics comments out of DOD (Department of Defense). 
We have a big gap to fill, 180,000 new jobs, so we cannot leave 
anyone behind, and it is a critical part of our thinking, how 
are we going to fill those jobs? How are we going to engage 
everyone from across the United States to be actively engaged 
in training, upskilling, and really meeting the needs of this 
new workforce demand that we're about to create?
    Since manufacturing left the United States holistically, 
we've lost the ability to train those types of people for these 
kinds of jobs, and we are wholly focused on that through the 
CHIPS Act and through the Manufacturing USA program as well and 
MEP. Thank you.
    Mrs. Foushee. And last, how are you coordinating with other 
agencies on this?
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, so we are coordinating with many other 
agencies, NSF primarily in the workforce development, but also 
DOE, DOD, and all the other agencies who are involved in the 
semiconductor area and who are a part of CHIPS. So we have many 
conversations, ongoing conversations about how to most 
effectively meet the demand across many different levels of 
skills, right, from the people who are going to be the 
technicians in the fabs all the way to the Ph.D. innovators who 
are going to be creating the new companies.
    Mrs. Foushee. Thank you. That's my time, Mr. Chairman. I 
yield back.
    Mr. Baird. The gentlelady yields back, and next, we go to 
Florida with Representative Franklin.
    Mr. Franklin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Dr. 
Locascio, for being here with us this morning. My first 
question, in the last Congress, I introduced H.R. 4956. It was 
the Leadership in Global Tech Standards Act of 2021. It was 
going to direct the Small Business Administration to award 
grants to small businesses to participate in the standards and 
development process. A similar provision was incorporated into 
the CHIPS and Science Act, which requires a pilot program 
that's going to award grants to private companies, nonprofits, 
and academia to incentivize and support their participation in 
international standards setting. Just wondering if you could 
talk to us about that, you know, what are the plans for it? How 
do you see it being implemented? And does the President's 
budget support this?
    Dr. Locascio. Well, thank you for that question. Yes, it's 
very, very important that, as you said, the title of the bill, 
Leadership in Global Tech, it's very important at the standards 
table that we are able to engage all the right technical 
experts because that's really how you do the best work at the 
international standards table, right? You're sitting there, you 
have the best technological solutions, and you have the people 
who can promote and defend them in an international arena. And 
so we need the experts there, and so NIST is planning to have 
numerous activities that will be related to trying to engage 
and provide the ability for small companies and universities to 
participate in the international standards arena.
    There are many mechanisms we're considering. We are going 
to be forming a center of excellence around standards 
development, and that will be one mechanism likely through 
which we'll pull and draw in for training and education around 
standards development and how to participate most effectively 
at the international level.
    Mr. Franklin. Well, I appreciate that. I often hear from 
small businesses. They have great ideas, and all the innovators 
want to participate at a deeper level, but it's just hard for 
them to get engaged in the process.
    Dr. Locascio. Absolutely. And one of the things that we do 
is we do precompetitive research with a lot of small companies, 
and that allows us to bring their information also to the 
standards table if they don't want to be there directly.
    Mr. Franklin. Great. Thank you. Shifting over to 
cybersecurity, NIST plays a critical role in the Nation's 
cybersecurity, and your organization helps reduce cyber risks 
to Federal agencies, multiple industries, and critical 
infrastructure through the creation of voluntary frameworks and 
standards. How is NIST using its cybersecurity expertise to 
assist Federal agencies in improving critical infrastructure, 
cybersecurity such as assisting in the adoption and the 
application of the Cybersecurity Framework?
    Dr. Locascio. So our Cybersecurity Framework does have very 
broad reach and global adoption and very, very strong adoption 
within the United States, but we understand our gaps and that 
we need to be communicating with the right people at the 
right--all the time in order to make sure that it can get 
adopted into specific areas. And so critical infrastructure, of 
course, is a very important part of the work that we do, 
communicating with people who are involved in critical 
infrastructure and making sure the Cybersecurity Framework is 
adopted in and included in the way that they think about 
shoring up their security of their information systems.
    Mr. Franklin. Thank you. The President's budget requests an 
increase of $20 million for further investment in this 
cybersecurity and privacy portfolios to meet increased demand 
in the areas of critical national importance. To the extent 
that you're able to here, can you talk to us about where 
further investment is needed and how the President's budget is 
going to support that?
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, thank you for that question. So in 
cybersecurity, we have many different areas that we're working 
in, but we are focused in the budget on workforce development, 
cybersecurity supply chain, the security of our supply chains, 
and the development--I'll just give a few examples--and the 
development of postquantum cryptography standards that can make 
sure that we are prepared for the next generation of computing 
and protected against it in terms of our encryption algorithms. 
So we have a number of different activities that we're doing, 
but related to workforce, development of the new Cybersecurity 
Framework, and security for postquantum encryption algorithms.
    Mr. Franklin. Thank you, Dr. Locascio.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Franklin. And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Baird. Thank you. The gentleman yields back.
    And we're going to stay in Florida with Representative 
Frost.
    Mr. Frost. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning. Like it 
was mentioned, I am from Florida, a State uniquely threatened 
by the effects of global warming caused by greenhouse gas 
emissions, and so I'm glad that NIST is taking the threat 
seriously by asking for the $5.5 million increase in funding to 
assess the impact of carbon on the environment. And we know 
that forests can be effective at absorbing carbon pollution, 
but currently, deforestation in places like the Amazon and in 
the American West make it more and more difficult to slow 
global warming, and plus, it's already difficult to measure how 
these offset emissions at a rate that will be helpful in 
mitigating climate change.
    You have mentioned that NIST is working on metrics around 
CO2 removal, both with natural-based solutions and 
others. Can you describe how that work on CO2 
removal and how the additional funding you're requesting will 
help further that work?
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, thank you for that question. So we have 
a number of activities that have been going on for a long time 
in terms of being able to accurately measure and monitor carbon 
dioxide and its removal, and we work with a number of other 
agencies, NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration), NASA (National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration), and others, to ensure the quality of 
measurements that are made around carbon dioxide in our world 
and how it's removed. Some of this new money will be 
specifically focused on a continued understanding of the 
development of new technologies for carbon removal and 
sequestration and also an understanding of how natural sources 
contribute to carbon dioxide removal.
    Mr. Frost. How will this work benefit everyday people in 
Florida and people across the globe long term?
    Dr. Locascio. Yeah, that's a really great question. Our 
work is really to ensure that we have accurate measurements and 
an understanding of what is going on with all of the different 
sources of carbon dioxide that are in our world, right, around 
our spaces in the United States around the globe. And so it is 
really the underpinning work that we do that assures that 
people can understand what is going on in the environment. But 
at the same time, we're developing new technologies that can 
help people capture carbon and to understand carbon accounting 
as well. So there are many ways that NIST's work will help you 
in your State, but also really help the world.
    Mr. Frost. Yes, and along with the climate crisis, central 
Florida in my district, we're currently experiencing one of the 
worst affordable housing crises in the entire country, so we 
need a lot of housing. We need it quickly, but we also have to 
ensure that it's safe, especially with the horrible storms that 
we're getting. With those climate threats in mind, can you 
please explain how NIST supports investigations under the 
National Construction Safety Team Act to help build safe for 
the environment?
    Dr. Locascio. Sure, thank you so much for that question. 
NIST supports investigations under that authority, so we 
conduct investigations under that authority, and as matter of 
fact, we've been in your State not in your district for a while 
now. And we are asked frequently, can we come and study this 
new disaster. And more and more often people come to us to ask 
us that. We have a matrix under which we look to see if the 
work that we do, should NIST be brought in, first of all, and 
the reason why NIST should be brought in under any 
circumstances is, first of all, there's a loss of human life 
that has been devastating, and--of course, as it would be--and 
can NIST really do some research that would help understand how 
to make it better next time, right? So that's how we 
participate. We do long-term research, we go into these places 
like Surfside, try to understand what did cause the collapse, 
and then parlay that into building codes and standards that can 
ensure the quality of construction moving forward.
    Mr. Frost. Yeah, and can you quickly--so FloridaMakes, 
which is a business in my district, received $2 million in MEP 
funding from NIST to help rebuild small- and medium-sized 
businesses after the storm. Can you talk briefly about how that 
funding impacts the work that you do to help rebuild businesses 
after climate disasters?
    Dr. Locascio. So--I'm sorry, could you repeat that? Sorry.
    Mr. Frost. In 2017, FloridaMakes, a business in our 
district, received $2 million in MEP funding from NIST to help 
support the rebuilding of businesses.
    Dr. Locascio. Yeah. So the MEP funding is really there to 
support business resilience in the location where this 
occurred. So the money that we got in the disaster bill was 
really focused on that. How can you help communities come back? 
How can their businesses come back? And how can they thrive 
after a disaster? And so that funding was specifically for 
that.
    Mr. Frost. Yeah, well, thank you so much for your work, the 
work that NIST does. It's incredibly integral to what goes on 
in my State, especially with the horrible climate disasters 
that we experience every single year. So thank you for that 
work, and I yield.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Baird. The gentleman yields back. Thank you.
    And, next, we go to Representative McCormick.
    Mr. McCormick. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    During the--thank you for being here, by the way. This is 
very enlightening. During the Obama Administration, a legacy 
sign-on service called login.gov was provided by the General 
Services Administration (GSA) Technology Transformation 
Services to help people access accounts with government 
agencies ranging from the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) to 
Social Security Administration. The login.gov website states it 
is, quote, ``the public's one account and password for the 
government,'' end quote.
    Following a March 2023 GSA OIG (Office of Inspector 
General) report, bipartisan scrutiny of the website program has 
been renewed. The GSA OIG report found, again, quote, ``GSA 
misled their customer agencies when GSA failed to communicate 
login.gov's known noncompliance with the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology Special Publication 800-63-3, digital 
identity guidelines, specifically, Identity Assurance Level 2 
(IAL2).'' It further states that, once again, quote, ``GSA 
continued to mislead customer agencies, even after GSA 
suspended efforts to meet SP 800-63-3.'' These agencies charged 
over $10 million for cybersecurity services that weren't even 
provided in the first place. This is incredibly concerning for 
me, as somebody who basically is responsible for these taxpayer 
dollars and its lack of security they're applied. Were you 
aware of this report?
    Dr. Locascio. I am aware of this report, yes.
    Mr. McCormick. OK. Just to kind of add--and I'm going to 
set up the question for you just so you can knock it out of the 
park if you will. When it comes to digital identity proofing, 
what does NIST Identity Assurance Level 2 compliance mean in 
combating identity theft? And why would Biden Administration 
want a government-driven product like login.gov to achieve that 
particular standard to the extent that it would even mislead 
other Federal agencies about having those capabilities? In 
other words, we're spending a lot of money. We don't have the 
cybersecurity it's promised, and it's a one-site-serves-all 
that's worrisome to me when it comes to security--securing 
people's identity, which we're all concerned about, and we 
don't even have something--a failsafe that's working right now.
    Dr. Locascio. So NIST does produce digital identity 
guidelines, and you're right, we have IAL2 compliance is what 
you're referring to the IAL2, the identity assurance guideline. 
We have recently also updated that. We don't audit other 
agencies, and I really can't speak to the GSA issue, but I will 
say that we have recently updated our guidelines, and that's 
available for--and has broad uptake by the community as well.
    Mr. McCormick. OK. Guidelines, got it. The IAL2 standard 
has been referred to as once again, quote, ``not just a 
compliance requirement. In the world of remote identity 
proofing, it is aligned between a system that can fend off bulk 
identity theft attacks coming from organized criminals, and one 
that cannot,'' end quote. Despite the troubling findings of the 
OIG report, the White House reportedly still wants to move 
forward on mandating--mandating--the use of login.gov through 
Executive order at all Federal agencies. It's already mandated 
at the VA (Veterans Affairs) through va.gov, which, once again, 
alarms me if we don't have the proper--you can have guidelines, 
but if you don't have the actual security and it's mandated, 
you can understand how this would be very concerning to any 
veteran or anybody else who wants to use these websites. How 
does NIST play into that, besides guidelines? Is there any 
true--are you hammering this home with people, that this is a 
real concern for people's identity that's being required by a 
government to use?
    Dr. Locascio. So our role is to produce these guidelines, 
and we don't do the compliance piece, but we produce the 
important information that people need to know in order to 
secure their systems, and they are publicly available and used.
    Mr. McCormick. Thank you. I'm just going to give you one 
more chance to comment on this because I think it's important 
to hammer home because this affects a lot of Americans, anybody 
who wants to use the .gov site. What is GSA's misrepresentation 
of the login.gov's IAL2 capabilities mean for veterans and 
their dependents trying to access sign-in services to verify 
their identity? Since you're the expert, I'll let you have the 
final word.
    Dr. Locascio. I'm sorry, I appreciate the question, but I 
cannot comment on that, but thank you.
    Mr. McCormick. With that, I yield.
    Mr. Baird. Thank you. And now we go to Representative 
McClellan.
    Mrs. McClellan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Dr. 
Locascio.
    It is exciting to see NIST programs and how they're 
supporting domestic manufacturing capacity. Just last year, the 
manufacturing extension partnership in Martinsville, Virginia, 
helped maintain over 1,300 jobs, and in my district, it has 
supported smaller businesses that provide machining and 
industrial services, as well as manufacturers of specialized 
materials and electric motors, and we're pretty excited about 
that.
    And I will say, as a mother of two young children who has 
seen firsthand how difficult it is to find affordable, quality 
childcare, I'm very excited that the Administration recognizes 
how critically important childcare is to maintaining a good 
workforce, so thank you for that as well.
    At the launch of NIST's AI Risk Management Framework, Dr. 
Alondra Nelson, the former acting Director of OSTP, noted that 
AI tools are too often developed without the input or the 
consent of the people whose lives they will touch. Can you 
discuss how NIST's budget supports broad public engagement to 
ensure that diverse perspectives are incorporated in these 
frameworks?
    Dr. Locascio. Yeah, so thank you for that question. As we 
develop our work in AI risk management, we engage the community 
very, very broadly. Moving forward, we intend to have a public 
working group--with the new FY '24 funds--have a public working 
group through which we can obtain the perspectives of everyone 
and we want to hear from everyone to understand their concerns, 
the impact on the communities, and the impact on the 
individuals around the country and the organization. And so I 
think that's a really important part of how we plan to move 
forward with the AI RMF.
    Mrs. McClellan. And given the increased use of AI in 
applications that include healthcare, criminal justice, 
decisionmaking, there is a huge potential for algorithmic bias 
to exacerbate social inequities. Can you talk about NIST's work 
to develop guidance to help organizations that make algorithms 
avoid this garbage in, garbage out problem?
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, thank you for that. So that is clearly a 
risk associated with AI. The AI Risk Management Framework looks 
at technical characteristics like accuracy. Is your algorithm 
accurate? But it also really looks at the human at the end, 
right? Is it biased? Is it fair? Is it safe? Is it secure? And 
I think that's what makes it very different from anything else 
that NIST has ever produced because we really do think 
holistically about responsible and trustworthy AI and the human 
impact on it. So we've had a lot of impact from community 
groups in that regard, and moving forward, we will continue to 
make sure that's a priority and that we can help people 
understand how to measure their systems for bias.
    Mrs. McClellan. Thank you for that. A recent GAO report 
found gender-related imbalances in career advancement and 
leadership roles at NIST, as well as an ``unwelcoming 
environment''--that was their quote--for women that may cause 
some to leave. Will NIST's budget request for diversity, 
equity, inclusion, and accessibility initiatives help address 
these issues?
    Dr. Locascio. Absolutely. That is a No. 1 priority for me.
    Mrs. McClellan. And can you elaborate on how?
    Dr. Locascio. So recently--yes, of course. Recently, we're 
in the process of hiring our second Chief Diversity Officer. 
Our first Chief Diversity Officer now works for the House, so 
we lost her, but we're in the process of a hiring our second 
one. And we have a new diversity, equity, and inclusion and 
accessibility strategic plan that we launched last year with a 
tremendous amount of engagement across the organization. There 
are multiple layers of things that we are looking at doing 
first, making sure that everything that we do represents NIST 
the way that we want it to be represented externally and 
internally, make everyone know that they're welcome and 
included in the way that we think about NIST. But also, we 
cannot ignore the fact that we have to continue to measure and 
monitor how we're doing as we implement new programs toward 
promotions, recruitment, retention of diverse candidates.
    Mrs. McClellan. So thank you for that. Mr. Chair, I yield 
back.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentlelady yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from New York, Mr. 
Williams, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Dr. Locascio, I come out of the tech industry, so I have 
spent a lot of time in industry technology standard meetings 
around the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics 
Engineers), you know, ITU, ISO (International Organization for 
Standardization), ISA (International Society of Automation), 
and IEEE, all the fun people are there. It's really exciting, 
and it's--it is just--you know, for context, you know, for my 
colleagues that, you know, our phone that we rely on 
encompasses--I'm going to make up a number--but easily hundreds 
of different standards, many of which, you know, come and 
originate out of the NIST. So I certainly appreciate your work, 
and I'm so glad to be freed from those industry standards 
meetings.
    But the--there's two issues, I think, pretty 
straightforward questions today, and just to tee it up for you, 
one is just status on the Manufacturing USA program, and the 
second is related to other components around chip fab, 
specifically about printed circuit boards (PCBs). So if I may 
just provide a little context, and then those are two areas of 
questions. We're very fortunate to have Micron investing in my 
district, historically important and historically large 
investment, and, of course, the CHIPS Act and your work at 
NIST, you know, is critical to that success. And can you 
provide me an update and all of us an update on the status of 
the Manufacturing USA program and specifically as it relates to 
semiconductors? And I understand that there will be three sites 
selected for institutes. I'm not sure if that's still current, 
but if you could just give me and my colleagues some context 
there, that would be helpful. Thank you.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you so much. We had an RFP that we 
released last year.
    Mr. Williams. Great.
    Dr. Locascio. We got a lot of information from people on 
what they think we should be doing with the Manufacturing USA 
funds specifically around semiconductors. We have the funding, 
of course, as you know, and the authorization to do one or up 
to three----
    Mr. Williams. OK.
    Dr. Locascio [continuing]. And so there are a number of 
ways that we've been looking at whether it should be one really 
large one or three smaller ones, and specifically, that 
conversation is really around technology focus areas. Where are 
the gaps in our other R&D--chips R&D programs that might not be 
filled and need to be filled by Manufacturing USA, for 
instance, more precise manufacturing techniques that would be 
needed by the semiconductor industry or virtual--3-D 
virtualization of components as you're putting them together 
either in packaging or in fabrication. So we are still 
considering one or up to three, but we will have the request 
for proposals, then Notice of Funding Opportunity will be 
released at the end of this----
    Mr. Williams. OK.
    Dr. Locascio [continuing]. Before the end of this year.
    Mr. Williams. OK. Thank you for that context. That's more 
up to date than what I have.
    There's a company my district Graphic Technology, Inc., 
that does these printed circuit boards, and chips really 
focuses on the semiconductor and not necessarily on the 
platform that they write on, which are these PCBs. There's a 
lot of supply chain issues, and a lot of the supplies come out 
of China. Can you just briefly tell me how you view that or how 
NIST views that and are we addressing that supply chain issue 
in part through some of the funding and programs that you're 
sponsoring?
    Dr. Locascio. Well, thank you for that question. There are 
a couple of ways we're looking at that, issues around 
substrates for instance----
    Mr. Williams. Yeah.
    Dr. Locascio [continuing]. And supply chain in general. The 
second Notice of Funding Opportunity will deal with supply 
chain so that the suppliers--basically the material suppliers 
and the instrument suppliers who serve the semiconductor 
industry because obviously, that's very critical to the success 
of any fabs that we build in the United States. So there will 
be funding opportunities for suppliers, critical suppliers, for 
the semiconductor industry.
    And then we also are going to be looking at funding 
opportunities for people to develop new types of substrates or 
advances in substrates as we look at the development of the 
packaging program--as we are developing the packaging program 
and establishing the NSTC.
    Mr. Williams. Great, thank you. And just for my last few 
seconds here, just comment that before deciding to run for 
office, I was involved with the Open Process Automation Forum 
that is modernizing the industrial control systems for the 
process industries, which you may know is, you know, oil and 
gas, chemical, food and beverage, et cetera, and we're using 
the NIST framework as the framework that--to develop that 
industrial cybersecurity for these open architecture systems 
that's known as the open process automation standard. And so 
firsthand, I've actually had to use some of your documents, 
although I'm not on the technology side, but anyway, thank you 
for your work.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentleman's time has expired. The Chair 
now recognizes the gentleman from--gentlelady from 
Pennsylvania, Ms. Lee, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Dr. 
Locascio, for your attendance today.
    The National Institute of Standards and Technology plays a 
critical role in advancing U.S. innovation and competitiveness. 
Away from the abstract, NIST's work has a direct impact on the 
daily lives of citizens to improve not only the quality of 
products, services, and infrastructure, but also improve our 
quality of life and standard of living. For example, SMS Group, 
Incorporated, headquartered in my district, PA 12, received 
NIST support to implement improvements to employee engagement, 
satisfaction, and morale. Innovation does not stop at 
technological development. American innovation includes the 
day-to-day human elements of our economy. It excites me to know 
more success stories like these are bound to occur in my 
district and across the country through the work that is done 
with funding for NIST. This work changes lives,
    Dr. Locascio, methane emissions from orphaned and abandoned 
oil and gas wells in my district threaten public safety, public 
health, and it contributes significantly to climate change. How 
is research in developing greenhouse gas measurement tools and 
standards being utilized to protect my constituents from 
polluted air? And how do we hold polluting corporations 
accountable?
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, thank you for that question. So we're 
developing a number of new technologies, but I think the most 
important thing is that we're developing the measurements and 
standards so that people can apply those technologies to more 
accurately understand the sources and the concentrations in the 
environment. So we are there working across the community to 
ensure that these standards are met and our standards are used 
and can meet the demands of the local economies so that they 
can understand their issues.
    Some of the funding that we're going to be asking for in 
the '24 budget is specifically around measuring greenhouse 
gases, and we have programs called the Urban Dome, and the 
Urban Dome is really to kind of do a holistic assessment of the 
presence of greenhouse gases in the environment in specific 
regions in the country.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you. I highlighted earlier that the American 
innovation we strive for in the Committee is not limited to 
technology. How critical to achieving the NIST mission is it to 
support workers through prioritizing grant funding to companies 
that utilize union labor and expanded access to childcare, for 
instance?
    Dr. Locascio. So you've seen--we've talked about this a few 
times already. Thank you for that question--of what is 
available in the CHIPS incentives portion of the manufacturing 
incentives that we've just released, which do include 
childcare, and we've had a lot of discussions around that. 
Workforce development is really a critical piece of anything 
that we do. It's really important to make sure that everybody 
can be engaged and come to the table and have the 
opportunities, and we need so many people in the tech sector. 
We're trying to compete with China right now for global 
technology leadership, and so we cannot miss the opportunity to 
have everyone engaged in our technology economy.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you. So my district is home to some of the 
worst air quality in the Nation on any given day. SKC 
Incorporated, a local business in western Pennsylvania, 
manufactures quality air sampling equipment and is one of the 
thousands of success stories under the Hollings Manufacturing 
Extension Program. How does NIST strategically target partners 
for technical assistance to support underrepresented 
populations in manufacturing?
    Dr. Locascio. First of all, I would like to thank you for 
that question, and I would love to hear more specifics about 
that case because if we aren't working with them, we may want 
to work with them in our new programs that we're building 
around air capture and air quality. But the way that we 
typically do things in the open competition model where we look 
for opportunities to have people compete and then we select the 
best possible innovative solution that can meet the demands of 
what we're trying to accomplish, but we have a very important 
focus on making sure that we get solutions from a diverse 
audience because that's where the creativity comes from, right? 
If we have more people engaged in creative solutions, then we 
come up with better outcomes, and so we have methods to make 
sure that we can promote diversity, equity, and inclusion in 
all of our processes.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you. And thank you so much for your time and 
for your answers. I yield back.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentlelady yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. 
Collins, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Collins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Doctor, the President's budget request asked for $98 
million for the Manufacturing USA program. There's a 165 
percent increase over appropriated levels. Now, according to 
the budget justification, this investment would lead to 10 new 
centers by FY 2028. Can you explain what 10 areas of advanced 
manufacturing these centers would cover? And I don't want you 
to include the centers focused on semiconductors now on the 
manufacturing because they're already receiving a total of $265 
million in mandatory funds that are in FY '24 for its three 
centers.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you very much for that question. So 
NIST, unlike other agencies who form Manufacturing USA 
Institutes, do an open competition really looking for the needs 
of the community at any given time. And so when we ran our 
first open competition, we had a variety of different sectors 
that came to the table, and we selected a biomanufacturing USA 
Institute, Nimble, and formed that. So we are going to be 
launching an open competition very soon, before the end of the 
year, and we'll be calling for concept proposals where people 
can tell us what they think we should be funding and then a 
full competition. We'll select and do a full competition that 
we will award in mid-'24.
    Mr. Collins. All right. Thank you. My commonsense 
legislation, the TRANQ Research Act, is about to be considered 
on the House floor. This legislation directs NIST to play a 
more active role in addressing the rapid spread of fentanyl 
containing xylazine, a drug cocktail commonly known as TRANQ.
    Dr. Locascio. Right.
    Mr. Collins. Can you speak on the unique capabilities of 
NIST to analyze illicit drugs like TRANQ, the work NIST has 
done already in this area, and the ways NIST can help local 
first responders who are on the frontline of this drug crisis?
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you so much for that question. We have 
been working in the area doing research in the areas of drugs 
of abuse detection for decades and always trying to stay ahead 
and understand how we can prepare people to detect what's 
coming, right? And so we have research in collaboration with 
the State that allows us to measure and monitor what we find 
from the street drugs that are submitted to our program and 
then disseminate that information so that people understand not 
only what to anticipate, but how to measure it, right, how to 
measure it themselves in what they're finding locally.
    Mr. Collins. OK. From what part of the President's budget 
request will these activities be funded?
    Dr. Locascio. The work particularly related to TRANQ?
    Mr. Collins. Yes.
    Dr. Locascio. I'd have to get back to you because I don't 
believe that we asked specifically for funding for that 
program.
    Mr. Collins. Right. OK. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 
That's all I have.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentleman yields back.
    Mr. Collins. Yes.
    Chairman Lucas. The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady 
from Oregon, Ms. Salinas, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Salinas. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the 
Chairman and the Ranking Member for today's hearing, and thank 
you, Dr. Locascio, for your participation.
    As many of my colleagues, I'm very interested in the issue 
of workforce development. In my district, Oregon 6, 
manufacturing accounts for nearly 40,000 jobs, and I hear 
consistently that businesses need more skilled technical 
workers. And, as you've mentioned, as we roll out these new 
programs from CHIPS and Science Act, the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Bill, Inflation Reduction Act, the need for 
those workers is really going to grow.
    And we recently had the Directors of NSF and NASA before 
this Committee, and I was excited to hear about some of their 
efforts in this area, particularly the NSF Regional Innovation 
Engine (RIE) Program. Our Oregon universities are partnering 
with manufacturers in my district on an RIE proposal in the 
semiconductor space, which would include a substantial 
workforce training component. And so with all these new 
opportunities, I want to be sure that we're getting the most 
bang for our buck. These are good jobs that often don't require 
a 4-year degree, as you well know, and we have a chance really 
to bring students from diverse backgrounds into critical 
industries for our future economy.
    And thank you for your exchange with my colleague from 
North Carolina, Mrs. Foushee, and others.
    So my first question is how will proposed budget cuts to 
our NIST civilian workforce affect the deployment of this new 
manufacturing and technology workforce?
    Dr. Locascio. So, first of all, I haven't been very 
specific about our workforce programs. Thank you for that 
question. Because we are in the process of really putting 
together and announcing our workforce programs within CHIPS, so 
that's coming, so----
    Ms. Salinas. Thank you.
    Dr. Locascio [continuing]. You can anticipate that coming. 
And we are bringing together universities and industries to 
really target and find out how best to link them to answer the 
needs of the community, so that, I think, is very important. So 
related to the CHIPS workforce, obviously, that funding is 
existing, and it's not impacted by any potential budget cuts, 
right? So within other workforce development programs, we have 
very important programs related to cybersecurity workforce 
development. We have a lot of workforce development in quantum 
through our joint institutes. We have a lot of workforce 
development activities in really all areas of critical and 
emerging technologies.
    With budget cuts or decreases, it would sharply decrease 
our ability to promote the STEM workforce in areas of critical 
and emerging technologies and at a time that these technologies 
are blooming and developing. And if we want to be the leading 
tech economy in the world, it is a really bad time to cut down 
on generating that next generation of STEM workforce.
    Ms. Salinas. Thank you. And then just a quick follow up, I 
feel like this is a softball for you, but is there more that 
Congress could do to help you and your counterparts at other 
agencies build that sustainable and inclusive STEM workforce 
pipeline?
    Dr. Locascio. Absolutely. So, I really appreciate that. We 
are already trying to work together in certain areas that are 
important for our economy, so I'll just give an example. We 
work with NSF in programs that we've recently released around 
the development of ICT (information and communications 
technology) technologies, and that has been, I think, a 
fantastic and exciting program. We also developed a new program 
around AI, responsible AI, with NSF. So I think there are a 
number of ways that not only can Congress support us in our 
workforce development programs, but also support the agencies 
working together there.
    Ms. Salinas. Thank you so much, and I yield back.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentlelady yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. 
Miller, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Miller. Thank you, Chairman Lucas and Ranking Member 
Lofgren, and thank you to Director Locascio for joining us 
today.
    Dr. Locascio, one of the driving imperatives behind passing 
the CHIPS Act last year was urgency. To be specific, the 
urgency was building leading-edge capacity within our borders 
like Intel's fabs in Ohio, and because it takes 3 years to 
build one of these fabs in time was--remains of the essence. 
What is your timeline to begin issuing funds for large-scale 
and leading-edge fabs in particular?
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you for that question. I can't give you 
the definitive timeline, but we are anticipating making 
announcements very soon. Hopefully, that will give you an 
indication of when you should see the full funding 
announcements coming.
    I'll say that the first NOFO we've received over 200 
statements of interest related to the first Notice of Funding 
Opportunity. We're hiring a lot of people to help us work 
through all of the different statements of interest. We're 
accepting full applications for fab facilities at this time. 
Each one will be negotiated independently. Each deal will be 
negotiated independently, so it's very complex dealmaking that 
will be conducted in order to get this right to make sure that 
we make the best deals for the country and support--and protect 
the taxpayer dollars. But you'll be seeing a lot out of the 
CHIPS R&D Office and the CHIPS Manufacturing Incentives Office 
in the next few months.
    Mr. Miller. OK, thanks. So the next few months, we should 
see some movement on that?
    Dr. Locascio. You will see a lot of information coming out 
of both offices on what to anticipate coming next.
    Mr. Miller. Is there any type of--and I don't mean to pry 
and push----
    Dr. Locascio. No, that's OK.
    Mr. Miller. Is there any type of speculation or 
guesstimation that you could make as to where these--you know, 
the funding that's going to be allocated?
    Dr. Locascio. Where or when?
    Mr. Miller. When.
    Dr. Locascio. I cannot speak to when it will be allocated, 
I'm sorry. There's so many different factors that come into it 
because of the complexity of each one of the deals that we're 
going to be making to support leading-edge, current generation, 
and mature node. But I'd be happy to talk to you more offline 
about the things that are going to be rolling out. And we are 
trying to be as transparent as possible in the whole process 
and to let you know what our timelines are.
    Mr. Miller. OK. Yeah, that would just be great because of 
the urgency of the nature and what we push for----
    Dr. Locascio. Of course.
    Mr. Miller [continuing]. We want to get it as fast as we 
can.
    Dr. Locascio. Of course, and that's our goal is to make 
sure not only that we get it out as fast as we can, but we do 
it right, and we protect taxpayer dollars, and that's our goal, 
and so we just need to make sure that we're doing it right.
    Mr. Miller. Understood.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Miller. The National Environment Policy Act, NEPA, will 
apply to projects awarded grants. My understanding is that NEPA 
review could slow down fund dispersal to grantees and even 
construction by perhaps a minimum of 1 1/2 years or possibly 
longer. What are your plans to address that significant delay 
in the face of urgent need to bring these fabs online? Are 
there specific reforms that should be implemented within the 
NEPA process?
    Dr. Locascio. You know, I really appreciate that question. 
We have encouraged everybody who is applying for these funds to 
think about this early, early on because, of course--and the 
big fabs already understand that obviously. That can cause 
project delays, and we want to be able to understand and 
anticipate any project delays.
    I talked to the CHIPS Program Office Director a few days 
ago, and he said that he's going to be putting probably 20 
percent of his time toward looking at NEPA issues, and we are 
forming a NEPA team on the government side who can facilitate 
working around these issues specifically.
    Mr. Miller. And just--there's an actual strategy and a 
framework of a game plan that you have in place that's going to 
be able to implement this in the timeframe that you would like? 
I--because I hear your response and your fantastic answers, but 
I want to know how we're going to do it----
    Dr. Locascio. Yeah.
    Mr. Miller [continuing]. In terms of timelines, in terms 
of, you know, you saying that we have this. But I want to know 
how we're going to do it and what are your direct answers to 
these questions----
    Dr. Locascio. Yeah.
    Mr. Miller [continuing]. Is really what I would like to 
know.
    Dr. Locascio. And I hear your question very clearly, and I 
thank you for that question. And I would love to follow up with 
you at the office----
    Mr. Miller. OK.
    Dr. Locascio [continuing]. And talk more about engagement 
on how we can make sure that we can meet our timelines.
    Mr. Miller. Understood. Thank you.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Miller. One last one. Is the Department currently 
reviewing existing categorical exclusions, CEs, to assess 
whether they could be used for proposed projects?
    Dr. Locascio. I'm sorry, I have to get back to you on that 
as well.
    Mr. Miller. OK.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Miller. All right. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentleman's time has expired.
    The Chair now turns to the gentlelady from Michigan, Ms. 
Stevens, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Stevens. Thank you for the 5 minutes of questioning, 
and thank you to Director Locascio for your incredible 
testimony. And in fact, it is such a delight to hear about NIST 
today in this Committee and in the halls of Congress, for NIST 
is the secret engine-that-could in the Congress. And some of us 
had the privilege of coming over to Gaithersburg alongside you 
at the very end of the last term in Congress right before we 
were about to have a new Congress come in. And one of the 
things I deeply appreciated was seeing the things that we don't 
oftentimes get to hear about. And by the way, it is such a 
delight to hear that, you know, so many of our colleagues on 
both sides of the aisle are celebrating the bipartisan passage 
of the CHIPS and Science Act, and so interested to hear about 
its inner workings. And, you know, as a polite reminder, we hit 
187 Democrats vote for CHIPS and 24 Republicans, and so just 
ask yourself, right, when it's time to take that vote, if 
you're going to be voting for that, particularly to our new 
Members because we know we did the work last term, and we want 
to continue to build off of that.
    But if you don't mind, Director, do you mind just sharing a 
little bit about NIST that maybe we haven't heard today? You 
know, again, some of these surprise things, industries that you 
touch that don't necessarily come to the forefront of that--of 
a hearing like this?
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you for that question. NIST, 1901 was 
when we were born. That was brought up earlier. Since we were 
born, we have really adapted to what is coming on the horizon. 
So now that we are a digital economy, we are growing and 
growing in areas related to communication technology and 
information technology so we can always meet the demands of the 
needs of the industry as they develop.
    Somebody asked me about quantum, and that is at the 
forefront of a lot of people's minds, but I want to bring it up 
that we've been involved in quantum for decades and decades, 
and it's been our priority for decades before it was on 
anybody's mind. We were doing this very basic research that led 
to the development of quantum clocks that are more accurate 
than anywhere in the world and that will lead to the 
redefinition of time on the global scale. That's the kind of 
work that we do.
    Ms. Stevens. Redefining time----
    Dr. Locascio. Redefining time----
    Ms. Stevens [continuing]. In the humble place called 
Gaithersburg, Maryland----
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, exactly.
    Ms. Stevens [continuing]. You know, in the NIST 
headquarters. And it's just--it's worth shining a light on and 
also bringing energy to and in part--look, I was working in one 
of the Manufacturing USA Institutes before I ever thought I 
would run for Congress and working alongside NIST and so 
appreciate your ability to sign MOUs (memorandums of 
understanding) and work very cross-functionally across 
government in a way that leads to profound outcomes and 
oftentimes puts you on a cutting edge. And I'll tell you, it 
was those budget cuts of 2017 that awakened me to the fact that 
we need to have more NIST champions in the Congress. We've got 
to have more people not just singing your praises, but doing 
this work alongside you to invest in your modernization, to 
make sure that we've got proper, you know, buildings that 
aren't falling apart, and I've seen those pictures, and I know 
that's been asked today.
    But there's a proposal that has come about--I think it was 
voted on from the other side of the aisle, a budget of a 22 
percent decrease to NIST, and here we are talking about 
competing with China, talking about, you know, competing on the 
global stage, doing the quantum, doing the chips, doing 
industrial policy. What does it mean to our competitiveness 
with China if we do that 22 percent cut?
    Dr. Locascio. It is a dire outlook, and if you have seen--
I'm sure you've seen the Australian Policy Institute--Strategic 
Policy Institute report that said 37 out of 44 leading 
technologies are being led by China. The U.S.----
    Ms. Stevens. Say that again.
    Dr. Locascio. Thirty-seven out of 44 leading technologies 
are led by China.
    Ms. Stevens. So we cut at our peril. We cut our budget 
and--right? We--that's the deal. So you want to default, you 
want to have, you know, cuts across the board, and maybe we 
might as well be going and voting for our adversaries.
    Dr. Locascio. It's a really difficult time in the context 
of today's global economy not only in terms of our competition 
in technological solutions, but also who is going to be the 
shaper of the foundational rules of the next global economy? 
That's where we are today.
    Ms. Stevens. Who is going to be the shaper? That is the 
question, and I think we leave that with the Committee, Madam 
Director.
    And with that, Mr. Chair, I yield back. Thank you. Great to 
see you.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentlelady's time is absolutely 
expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 
Issa, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Issa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Director, I--a couple of questions. One of them is earlier 
with the Ranking Member you touched on standard--SEP, 
Standards-Essential Patents. You made a decision to eliminate 
the 2019 standard and not replace it, even until today, with a 
replacement. Is that correct?
    Dr. Locascio. We----
    Mr. Issa. I know you have a proposed, but you have not 
replaced it.
    Dr. Locascio. We have not replaced it.
    Mr. Issa. So, basically, during that intervening period, 
Europe is going forward with a standard that we now have to 
come in second to. Doesn't the absence of guidance at the time 
that if you didn't like the previous one, the offer changes, if 
you knew what was, quote, wrong with the Trump era one, why 
couldn't you replace it with something more quickly, at least 
so that we would put down a stake in the ground and not find 
ourselves essentially behind the European Union, which 
ultimately means that you're going to propose more things that 
are their standard, isn't that correct?
    Dr. Locascio. Well, I appreciate that question. I deeply--
--
    Mr. Issa. I wouldn't appreciate it. It's not intended to be 
that appreciated.
    Dr. Locascio. I do because this is something that we have 
discussed often frequently. I meet with Kathi Vidal, who's the 
Director of the----
    Mr. Issa. As do I, but the question is, why didn't you--
first of all, let me make it two-part. The absence of a 
standard does put us at a disadvantage to Europe that's moving 
forward, correct? In fairness, in those discussions?
    Dr. Locascio. I can't say that it does.
    Mr. Issa. OK. So you won't answer or can't answer that. The 
second one is why wasn't there at least some comment at the 
point that one was eliminated about what--where we should go? 
If you knew what was wrong with Trump, did Biden know what was 
right?
    Dr. Locascio. So we did not--the two-thousand-eight----
    Mr. Issa. Nineteen.
    Dr. Locascio. Nineteen, thank you, replaced the 2014. We 
did not reinstate either. So right now, there is no policy 
statement coming out of the USPTO and NIST.
    Mr. Issa. Well, I look forward to--you have a draft now 
that we're looking at, but I look forward to some real 
guidance. I'm deeply concerned that it's already a difficult 
area that Ms. Lofgren and all of us who serve on the Courts 
Committee over in Judiciary are very concerned with.
    Let me move on to the other one that was brought up. 
Somewhere I saw $150 million as an estimate for what mandatory 
daycare is going to cost. Is that a reasonable figure or would 
you have an alternate?
    Dr. Locascio. I don't have a figure----
    Mr. Issa. OK. But it costs something.
    Dr. Locascio. I don't have any figures for you. I'm sorry.
    Mr. Issa. Well, what I want to know is where in the four 
squares did Congress say that you should drive up the cost by 
having your standards of what you think is fair for 
construction? We're not talking even about factories. We're 
talking about during construction.
    Dr. Locascio. So we are following all legal authorities 
that we have received, and based on the statements of interest 
that we've received from companies, we don't see any hesitation 
based on the requirements.
    Mr. Issa. Sure. If you're giving me money and telling me I 
have to do it, you're going to say, yes, sir, yes, sir, three 
bags full. So again, this drives up the cost. Now we could 
drive up the cost, you know, every time somebody takes in a 
foster child. We can give them 6 months off with pay during 
construction. Every time somebody thinks they have COVID 
without a test, we should have them stay home for 14 days. We 
could have a whole list of them. What I want to know is you 
said that under the CHIPS Act, your job was to protect--
protect--the taxpayers' money, the massive amount that was 
given. Do you believe you're protecting it by adding these 
additional mandates?
    Dr. Locascio. I do because, holistically, what this is 
doing is helping us holistically to create the workforce that 
we need in order to respond----
    Mr. Issa. So----
    Dr. Locascio [continuing]. To the demand----
    Mr. Issa [continuing]. A construction workforce mandates 
certain things which drive up the cost of production of that 
infrastructure, and you're saying that that maintains the 
workforce, but that's not the workforce for CHIPS. That's the 
workforce for construction. But even if it was the CHIPS 
portion, where in the square--four squares of this legislation, 
if anywhere, do you find that mandate, not do you have other 
authorities? Do--where do you find the mandate or intent by 
Congress?
    Dr. Locascio. Our No. 1 goal, No. 1, is to make sure that 
we bring manufacturing back to the United States----
    Mr. Issa. I appreciate that. My time is expired, but that 
wasn't responsive. Responsive would have been I don't find it 
in the four squares, but we had authority, so we did it.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentleman's time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. 
Casten, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Casten. Thank you, Mr. Lucas, and thank you, Director, 
for being here today.
    So I want to lead in by saying that my questions go well 
beyond the jurisdiction of this Committee and maybe beyond your 
expertise, so just stay with me here.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Mr. Casten. So as we think about any world where we are 
going to price greenhouse gas emissions and whether that's, you 
know, at the extreme an economy-wide cap-and-trade. Some of our 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle and the center 
talking about border tax adjustments. The White House is 
talking about social cost of carbon. We need to quantify 
greenhouse gas emissions at a very quantifiable level that's, 
you know, a specific number of tons at a specific location that 
can be tied to a specific activity.
    There's two pieces of your budget that I'd like to 
understand to what degree they contribute to that. The first is 
you've got this, I think it's a $2 million increase to measure 
essentially negative CO2 actions. We've--the work 
we've done in the agriculture spaces, we've done some stuff on 
the COVER Act to incentivize the use of cover crops, and we've 
gotten intellectually comfortable with practice-based 
legislation that says we're confident that X is going to reduce 
CO2, we're not confident how much, we don't know how 
durable it is, how long it's going to stay in the ground.
    As you look at the--at what you're hoping to do with that 
expansion, is that going to enable us to actually specifically 
say we know there was this much CO2 reduced at this 
point by this action and it is durable? And I don't say this as 
a judgment. Or is this really more about monitoring so we can, 
you know, understand global balances, which is also valuable? 
I'm not saying that one is better than the other, but how 
should we understand what we can do if you succeed with that 
part of your budget?
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, I appreciate that. So, right now, a lot 
of the work that we've done is really to look at various ways 
to capture carbon and--through manmade sort, through technology 
development, and we do intend to expand that. Now, to natural 
sources, right, so exactly what you're talking about. That's 
the point of the new funding that we'll be expending in the 
future if we get the budget.
    There will really be two ways that we'll focus. One is in 
the development of calibration methods, and one is in the 
development of standards to support better point measurements 
at site.
    Mr. Casten. OK. Would it get to the durability question, 
though?
    Dr. Locascio. I am going to have to get back to you on that 
if you don't mind.
    Mr. Casten. OK.
    Dr. Locascio. I would like to answer that question. I 
honestly can't.
    Mr. Casten. I mean, just as a personal matter, like I'm 
intrigued by how much carbon we could store in our soils, but 
it's hard----
    Dr. Locascio. Yes.
    Mr. Casten [continuing]. For me to say if we put it into 
the soil, is there going to be a flood next year? Is there 
going to be a fire----
    Dr. Locascio. So----
    Mr. Casten [continuing]. Is there going to be erosion?
    Dr. Locascio. So, in theory, we should be able to get to 
the durability question with the proposed work, but I want to 
be sure that I'm answering that correctly----
    Mr. Casten. OK.
    Dr. Locascio [continuing]. And make sure that we can get to 
the proposed solution for you.
    Mr. Casten. OK. Let me shift, and it's the same category of 
question but on the methane side. You're talking about these--
also these processes of frequency cones if I understand----
    Dr. Locascio. Yes.
    Mr. Casten [continuing]. The term right of using some 
electromagnetic spectrum data to figure out where the methane 
emissions are. We've got talks about methane fees and pricing, 
and, obviously, the gas industry is keen to reduce leaks 
because fewer leaks means I can sell more gas.
    Dr. Locascio. Right.
    Mr. Casten. The challenge has always been, you know, what 
do you do on assets that are either upstream of where a 
commercial entity has a meter or abandoned wells that are 
leaking and nobody has title to it anymore and it just--it's 
just left on the taxpayer or society to bear the cost of that? 
Will the improvements that you can do in methane metering give 
us the ability to not only ascribe the--you know, the location 
in space, but also in time sufficient for us to say this entity 
is responsible for this ton of methane, and in some methane 
fee, we can now connect the accounting or, again, is that more 
broadly geospatial data?
    Dr. Locascio. No, I believe so with distributed sensing, so 
the optical frequency comes as a technology that has been 
developed by NIST for many decades as well and a subject of a 
Nobel Prize, and so----
    Mr. Casten. Congratulations.
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, thank you. Just continuous stream of 
pulses of different frequencies that allow you to then use that 
to detect the absorption of various molecules and of the 
different frequencies of light, so it's kind of like a 
fingerprint of the different molecules that are present. But 
depending on how you distribute that and do the measurements, I 
don't know the accuracy with which we would be able to 
pinpoint, but I can also find that out for you.
    Mr. Casten. OK. Well, and I know we're out of time, but, 
you know, I'm thinking, you know, if we can get to a collection 
here and say I don't--there's been a bunch of commercial 
entities happening here----
    Dr. Locascio. Right.
    Mr. Casten [continuing]. And now we have a cloud of 
methane----
    Dr. Locascio. So where is the source----
    Mr. Casten [continuing]. Can we tie that back----
    Dr. Locascio [continuing]. Exactly. Yes.
    Mr. Casten [continuing]. Right, because----
    Dr. Locascio. Right.
    Mr. Casten [continuing]. That's a lot of the methane in the 
system.
    Dr. Locascio. Yes.
    Mr. Casten. I'm out of time. Thank you. I yield back.
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, thank you.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentleman's time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Colorado, Ms. 
Caraveo.
    Ms. Caraveo. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to Ranking 
Member Lofgren as well for the hearing today. Thank you, Dr. 
Locascio, for taking the time to speak with us today.
    I'm particularly excited, as Mr. Collins mentioned earlier, 
about a hearing that we are going to--sorry, about today's 
hearing because later this week, we will be voting on the bill 
that we have both worked on with--regarding the work that NIST 
can do around new methods and partnerships to make it easier 
and faster to detect drugs containing xylazine and other novel 
synthetic opioids. So as kind of a follow up to the questions 
that he asked earlier, you discussed the research that you can 
do in the detection and testing of these new substances. How do 
you go about disseminating that information, for example, to 
law enforcement agencies in order to keep our law enforcement 
officers and others involved in the testing of these and 
handling of these substances safe?
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, so I appreciate that question. We work 
directly with States, but we also disseminate our information 
through publications so people understand everything that we 
know when we find it out. We can disseminate that throughout 
the network.
    Ms. Caraveo. Wonderful. And I very much appreciate that 
work. Is there anything else that Congress can do to further 
help your actions around these efforts?
    Dr. Locascio. Well, thank you for that question. This is 
work that we have been doing sort of quietly, I think, behind 
the scenes for a very long time, but really contributing to 
public health. And, as we know, we're in a horrible time of 
crisis with regard to not only opioids but now fentanyl and 
TRANQ and multiple other things that are coming on the scene. I 
think we will always be chasing the next thing, so we always 
have to be ahead of the game in our understanding of what's 
appearing in our street drugs. Support for that program at 
NIST, I think, is really important moving forward. Thank you.
    Ms. Caraveo. Thank you. And I am fully committed to 
anything that you all need in order for us to kind of stop 
chasing our tails and provide you with funds and other 
resources to make sure that we're keeping ahead of what is 
going on to the streets and affecting our families. I would be 
interested in helping you more with that.
    In a much different vein, I am a pediatrician, and so I'm 
very interested both in children and their education and making 
sure that we are attracting as many people as possible in the 
future to science-based, STEM-based careers. And so I know that 
you have a significant presence in Colorado in particular where 
I'm from, and I'm very interested in you telling us more ways 
about how you support K through 12 students, especially in 
terms of diversity, both in terms of backgrounds, myself being 
a Latina, but also I represent a very rural district, and so 
geographic diversity is also very important to me.
    Dr. Locascio. This has been a passion of mine, I think, 
since I began researching at NIST. To really promote diversity 
in all the research that we do is so important because that's 
how we get to the best creative solutions, and so that's just 
full stop on that, right? So a lot of our programs are geared 
toward--especially our newer programs are geared toward making 
sure we're recruiting from diverse populations, and not only 
that, reaching back further and further to make sure that 
people--that everyone is interested in science who has that 
predisposition and who want--and open their eyes to science and 
welcome them into science and technology as a discipline moving 
forward.
    So a few of the things that we do for the K through 12 is 
we educate teachers and middle school science teachers to try 
to make it more interesting to engage diverse populations in 
the sciences, and so we teach them new types of experiments 
that might be appealing to younger students to make them 
attractive--to help them--to help bring them into the science 
fields, but we have a number of other programs. We have a lot 
of outreach to our local communities to engage public--I mean 
to engage students in science and technology.
    Ms. Caraveo. Great, well, I'm very appreciative of those 
programs, also looking forward to supporting your efforts on 
that. Thank you for the work that you do.
    And with that, Mr. Chair, I yield back my time.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentlelady yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. 
Kean, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Kean. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Dr. Locascio.
    In New Jersey, the Manufacturing Extension Partnership 
program has provided essential support to manufacturers, 
helping them enhance efficiency, cut costs, and adopt new 
technologies. With the program's importance in mind, many are 
curious about how the President's budget--back that. How does 
the President's budget request support the goals and the 
strategies outlined in the Manufacturing Extension Partnership 
2023 to 2027 strategic plan?
    Dr. Locascio. So it will be very, very--thank you for that 
question. It will be very clearly focused on supply chain 
vulnerabilities, also workforce development, which we've talked 
about a number of times here today, and also on really helping 
manufacturers innovate, so bringing new types of technological 
solutions into their current thinking. And the programs will be 
focused clearly on those three areas.
    Mr. Kean. Could you discuss some specific ideas that you 
have for the U.S. to broaden participation and the development 
of a strong and geographically diverse STEM workforce?
    Dr. Locascio. So thank you for that question. This is 
something that I'm really passionate about. There are a number 
of things that we are working on at NIST, including trying to 
recruit and retain diverse representation into the NIST 
workforce. I think we have a way to go, but I think we need to 
do that internally first, and that's one of the things that 
we're working on.
    Now, nationally, I think we can be and become a place that 
is much more active in reaching out to different organizations 
to help diversify the STEM workforce, and we are engaging in 
those programs now.
    Mr. Kean. OK. And then the European Union AI Act is 
advancing quickly and contains many provisions regulating risk 
assessment----
    Dr. Locascio. Yes.
    Mr. Kean [continuing]. Setting technical standards, and 
other activities within the NIST's purview. How has NIST 
engaged with their--with your European counterparts during 
their process? And how should the U.S. respond to the E.U.'s 
efforts?
    Dr. Locascio. So we are engaged internationally with the AI 
RMF framework. First of all, we have engaged early and often in 
the development of the AI RMF framework with our international 
partners. Our goal is to make sure that this becomes the way 
that people want to look at AI, responsible AI globally. So a 
number of different ways that we're actively engaged on the 
international level, especially in Europe, the TTC (Trade and 
Technology Council), the U.S.-E.U. Tech and Trade Council. We 
have activities in responsible AI specifically where 
discussions are ongoing about responsible AI. I think that's 
probably the primary focal point of our discussions with the AI 
RMF with the E.U.
    The second way is one of the NIST people who was actually 
behind the AI RMF, she actually testified recently, Elham 
Tabassi. She is a Co-Chair on the OECD (Organization for 
Economic Cooperation and Development) working group that is 
engaged in AI more broadly, responsible AI, and so we are out 
there really seeking to make sure we can harmonize with what's 
going on globally, actively engaged in that.
    Mr. Kean. Thank you, Dr. Locascio.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 
Mullin, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Mullin. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Thank you, Doctor, for your testimony. My district is the 
birthplace and epicenter of biotechnology, the life sciences. 
We've got a major hub, over 300 companies there. And I am new 
to the Congress, new to this Committee, and candidly, I wasn't 
aware of NIST until preparing for this hearing. So if you might 
be able to educate me on how the agency interacts with the life 
sciences industry. Specifically, how does the work of your 
agency support and further the innovation economy, and maybe a 
little bit on just the challenges of that public-private 
relationship and interaction? I would be curious to get your 
thoughts on that.
    Dr. Locascio. Yes, thank you for that question. And we have 
a number of ways that we interact with the life sciences 
community. One, we develop standards, and let me just sort of--
I'll put this in the way that makes it more interesting 
perhaps--and consortia around the development of standards. So 
several years ago, we developed the gene editing consortium, 
and there is engagement of all the major companies who are 
involved in gene editing. Our goal is to make sure that when 
you're editing the genome, you know what you did, right? You 
know what you did and you know how to anticipate the outcome. I 
think that's a really critical role for NIST. We are not in the 
discovery area, right? That's what the life sciences--the 
biotech community is doing. They're in the discovery area. 
We're here to ensure that what they're doing, they've got a 
handle on understanding the changes that they make or how the 
product works or the quality of the product. So we also have 
standards around antibody-based therapeutics, which were 
important during COVID, but they're important for many, many, 
many different diseases. And those are to make sure that they 
understand the quality with their antibody-based therapeutic. 
So it's around standards and consortium that can help bring 
quality to the products.
    Mr. Mullin. Thank you for that. And switching gears to a 
different topic, we're hearing a lot about extreme weather 
events and climate resilience. We in California, that is 
certainly top of mind. And I understand that the agency is 
working on building more resilient communities. There are 
community-resilience standards that the agency has put out, 
which are targeted toward governments and community-level 
planning projects, flood control systems, that kind of thing.
    Meanwhile, I'm concerned about individual homeowners who 
are on their own having to take action to make their properties 
more resilient. Many communities are putting the onus on 
households to adapt their own property to withstand climate 
change and extreme weather. They're having to sort of go it 
alone right now. So I'm just curious if beyond that community-
level guidance, is NIST planning any work around developing 
standards directly applicable to individual homeowners and sort 
of hardening their property, making their own buildings more 
resilient? Or is that really the realm of other entities or 
individuals on their own to deal with? Curious if you're 
looking at that.
    Dr. Locascio. Well, thank you for that. When we do incident 
response--or when we do response and investigation of disasters 
is really geared toward an understanding of how to really make 
buildings more secure and resilient, and so that includes 
housing in these areas. And so the way that we disseminate 
that, that gets disseminated into building codes and standards 
to help build more resilient housing for people, help build 
more resilient businesses. So it doesn't leave out the people. 
It's really focused on how can we make sure that anything that 
we're learning from our investigations gets translated into 
buildings and codes and standards that make people's lives more 
secure?
    Mr. Mullin. Thank you for that, Doctor. And with that, I 
yield back.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentleman's time has expired.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California, Mr. 
Lieu, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Lieu. Thank you, Chairman Lucas and Ranking Member 
Lofgren, for holding this hearing. Thank you, Dr. Locascio, for 
your public service.
    I'd like to ask you about the Risk Management Framework for 
Artificial Intelligence. I first I want to commend NIST for 
coming out with this framework in January of this year. Their 
framework has at its core sort of four steps, right, govern, 
map, measure, and manage, and then there are standards and 
guidance within each of those steps. I think it's a good 
framework. I'm wondering, what has the feedback been to NIST 
from the stakeholders?
    Dr. Locascio. Oh, you know, I appreciate that question. 
We've had incredible response from the stakeholders, really 
good response from both large and small business community in 
the United States. And I'll also say that the NAIAC, the 
National AI Advisory Committee has recently also recommended 
the adoption of the AI Risk Management Framework more broadly.
    Mr. Lieu. Thank you. Have the Federal agencies adopted this 
framework?
    Dr. Locascio. The Federal agencies--I don't know the extent 
to which Federal agencies or industry has adopted the framework 
yet. I know that a lot of people are considering the adoption 
and working on the adoption of the framework.
    Mr. Lieu. OK.
    Dr. Locascio. I haven't seen----
    Mr. Lieu. Now----
    Dr. Locascio [continuing]. Sort of the official----
    Mr. Lieu. Right.
    Dr. Locascio [continuing]. You know, adoption.
    Mr. Lieu. NIST spent a lot of time on this, met with a lot 
of people, had a lot of iterations, had lots of stakeholder 
meetings. Why is OMB now going to reinvent the wheel and do 
guidance of Federal agencies? Why not just have Federal 
agencies just adopt the framework that you had all these 
meetings and stakeholder input on?
    Dr. Locascio. I can't speak for OMB, but I will say that 
they have asked for our input, so that's----
    Mr. Lieu. I'm just--what is the thinking there? I don't--
you spent all these resources developing this framework. OMB 
doesn't have the time to do their own thing. Why are they 
reinventing the wheel? I don't get it. I'm just trying to 
understand what the thinking is there. What's the reason we 
don't just have every Federal agency adopt the framework you 
all put out?
    Dr. Locascio. I really can't speak to that. I don't----
    Mr. Lieu. All right. So I think NIST----
    Dr. Locascio. But I can say that----
    Mr. Lieu [continuing]. Should ask that question, and I 
would like a response to that question because I don't think 
reinventing the wheel makes a lot of sense, and--unless it's 
somehow that the Administration doesn't believe in your 
framework, but from what you're telling me, I think it got good 
feedback. It seems like it is a good framework, so I'm just 
curious. I don't really understand that process.
    All right. So after you release your framework in March, 
Open AI released the second version of ChatGPT, ChatGPT-4. It's 
generative AI. It's sort of another advancement in artificial 
intelligence. By the way, I'm a recovering computer science 
major, so all of this is enthralling to me. I find it amazing. 
I think AI is going to provide us a lot of benefits. It can 
also harm us. Does NIST have the resources and budget to deal 
with what we're seeing is increasing usage and increasing 
development of AI as you come up with, for example, framework 
version 2.0?
    Dr. Locascio. So I will say that the money that we are 
asking for for AI--first of all, I'll just go back and mention 
that we do have support from the Administration for the AI RMF. 
But I'll mention that the money that we're asking for for AI in 
the coming year in FY '24 is really going to be focused on 
generative AI. Part of it is going to be focused on taking the 
AI RMF framework and looking at that as a use case, working 
with the community, working with public engagement, and 
understanding and uncovering the risks associated specifically 
with generative AI. I think there are a number of things that 
we want to do in that area, and that will be part of the focus 
of the future of the next year's funds.
    Mr. Lieu. Do you have a timeline for when that framework 
might come out?
    Dr. Locascio. Well, it will be based on the AI RMF 
framework, so it won't be an independent framework. It will be 
an application of the framework to generative AI----
    Mr. Lieu. OK, got it.
    Dr. Locascio [continuing]. Working with the community, very 
closely with the community, as we always do, so----
    Mr. Lieu. Thank you, and I yield back.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentleman yields back.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Ohio, Mrs. 
Sykes, for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Sykes. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Dr. 
Locascio, for being here with us. I hope I'm your last question 
today, as you've been here for quite some time.
    But I do want to talk to you or get your feedback and 
expertise on CHIPS and Science Act. I'm from Ohio. Obviously, 
the CHIPS and Science Act is really integral to our economy and 
our future, and over the last couple of weeks, I've asked many 
of our witnesses who have testified, including the National 
Science Foundation, about what would happen to their budget, 
their continued expertise, and opportunities for expansion and 
growth around technology if the majority's budget bill were to 
pass. And one of the things he shared was there'd be about 
280,000 semiconductor jobs that would be lost across the 
country. Obviously, that would be a significant impact for not 
only Ohio, but the entire country, our supply chains, and our 
national defense, our security, and competitiveness with the 
world, but wanted to just hear your take on that as well, 
whether or not you agree with--you may not exactly have that 
number, but whether or not you agree with those devastating 
impacts and what that could do to the semiconductor industry in 
this country.
    Dr. Locascio. I do think there will be devastating impacts, 
and I think that's agreed upon that it is not a time to take 
our foot off the gas in terms of competing in the technological 
landscape globally because if we do, other countries will 
gladly take over. So this is the time to invest in science and 
technology and not lose ground in science and technology. By a 
lot of estimates, we're already falling behind because they are 
investing in research and are investing in standards and 
investing in multiple areas that are in manufacturing. As a 
matter of fact, China has moved our Manufacturing USA 
Institutes as well. So it's really not time to take our foot 
off the gas, and I do think we'll lose a lot of ground in terms 
of our global economic competitiveness if we do.
    Mrs. Sykes. Thank you so much for sharing that, and I can 
say with some confidence our colleagues from both sides of the 
aisle have been strong supporters of the CHIPS Act, and I would 
certainly hate for us to lose our competitive advantage, as 
well as our economic opportunities in Ohio and across the 
country. And I know that your agency is doing quite a bit of 
work. We've--there's--your chips office in northeast Ohio, 
would love to come visit and see what you're doing, but if you 
could focus a bit more about--or share with me a bit more about 
if I were to go visit, what would I see there? What are some of 
the things that you're doing, particularly with the 
Manufacturing USA Institute, and ensuring that you have the 
workforce, you have the infrastructure necessary to produce the 
semiconductors and live up to the full potential of the CHIPS 
and Science Act?
    Dr. Locascio. There's so many moving parts right now within 
the CHIPS and Science Act and its implementation, including 
notice funding and opportunities that I think everyone is aware 
of and how that's going to lead to the increased capacity for 
building and manufacturing in this country, and we are so 
excited about that and working very, very hard on implementing 
that.
    At the same time, we are very excited about the 
implementation of the CHIPS R&D funding, so the manufacturing 
incentives are to bring manufacturing back to the United 
States. The R&D incentives are to keep it here because we are 
the innovators in the world, and we can't be beat. Both of 
those are really underpinned by a tremendous workforce 
development piece because of the demand, 180,000 new jobs 
created. We have to be able to support that. Otherwise, we lose 
both. We will lose manufacturing, and we will lose R&D, and we 
can't.
    Mrs. Sykes. Thank you, Doctor. I yield back and hopefully 
give you a minute back of your time.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    Chairman Lucas. The gentlelady yields back.
    Seeing no one else seeking recognition, I want to thank the 
doctor for her valuable testimony and the Members for the 
questions. The record will remain open for 10 additional days 
for comments and written questions from Members.
    This hearing is adjourned.
    Dr. Locascio. Thank you.
    [Whereupon, at 12:28 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

                               Appendix I

                              ----------                              


                   Answers to Post-Hearing Questions




                   Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Responses by Dr. Laurie E. Locascio
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]