Subcommittee Considers Recommendations to Improve Effectiveness of DOE National Laboratories Management
(Washington, DC) - Today, the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology’s Subcommittee on Energy held a hearing titled “Oversight and Management of Department of Energy National Laboratories and Science Activities.” The purpose of the hearing was to examine the Department of Energy’s (DOE) oversight and management of science and technology activities, particularly as they relate to the efficiency and effectiveness of the National Laboratory System. Members and witnesses considered ideas and recommendations for enhancing DOE support of science and innovation through reforms in areas related to management, performance, technology transfer, and laboratory authorities and regulations.
The DOE National Laboratory system provides the country with strategic and foundational scientific and technological capabilities on issues of national and global importance.
Ranking Member Eric Swalwell (D-CA) said in his opening statement, “Our national labs employ many of our country’s brightest minds in science and engineering, and they continue to inspire, train, and support new generations of American researchers and industry leaders. They also serve as an important path by which new technologies can move to market in ways that benefit its public and private partners alike, and in turn, the U.S. taxpayer. While it is important to recognize the great work being done across the country by our national labs as well as other researchers supported by Department of Energy programs, it is equally important to consider what opportunities exist to make improvements.”
Members and witnesses discussed recommendations made in a joint report from the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, the Center for American Progress, and the Heritage Foundation, entitled “Turning the Page: Re-Imagining the National Labs in the 21st Century Innovation Economy.” Merging the Department’s existing Under Secretaries for Energy and Science into a single Under Secretary for Science and Technology, and making technology transfer practices more efficient and effective through expanded application of ACT agreements or other methods were some of several recommendations that garnered bipartisan enthusiasm.
However, Democratic members cautioned against adopting approaches that could have unintended consequences on the ability of labs to enter into new partnerships with smaller companies and institutions.
Ranking Member Swalwell said, “A potentially interesting suggestion in the report is for Congress to allow National Laboratories to charge a market rate for proprietary research. I am concerned that this model could crowd out smaller, more innovative ideas from users that do not necessarily have funding behind them.”
Democratic members also expressed a desire to ensure that the National Laboratories remain committed to the highest levels of worker safety while reducing overhead costs, which could warrant a shift to OSHA regulations, similar to how the health and safety of laboratories operated by other government agencies and major private sector companies are regulated.
Testifying before the Subcommittee were two of the authors of the joint report, Mr. Matthew Stepp, Senior Policy Analyst at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, and Mr. Jack Spencer, Senior Research Fellow at the Heritage Foundation. Also testifying were Dr. Thom Mason, Director of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and Dr. Dan Arvizu, Director of National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
Related Content
Next Article Previous Article