Overview
Title
To require the Under Secretary of the Science and Technology Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security to develop a Department-wide policy and process to safeguard research and development from unauthorized access to or disclosure of sensitive information in research and development acquisitions, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
Imagine the Department of Homeland Security as a house full of important secrets. This bill wants to make sure they have strong locks and alarms so nobody sneaky can get into those secrets while they are working on new ideas and inventions.
Summary AI
H.R. 9748 is a bill that aims to strengthen the security of research and development activities within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). It requires the Under Secretary of the Science and Technology Directorate to create a policy to protect sensitive information from being accessed or disclosed without authorization during research and development processes. The bill also mandates a report from the Comptroller General on the Department’s compliance with certain national security guidelines and a briefing for Congress on the development of safeguarding policies.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The proposed legislation, known as the "Research Security and Accountability in DHS Act," is a legislative effort to enhance the protection of sensitive research and development within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Introduced in the 118th Congress and referred to as H.R. 9748, the bill seeks to establish a new, department-wide policy aimed at preventing unauthorized access and disclosure of sensitive information in research and development acquisitions. This initiative is driven by concerns over information security and the integrity of federal research initiatives.
General Summary of the Bill
The bill mandates that the Under Secretary for the Science and Technology Directorate of DHS develops a comprehensive policy and procedure to secure sensitive research information from unauthorized access or exposure. It also calls for a report from the Comptroller General assessing compliance with national security guidelines, specifically the National Security Presidential Memorandum–33 and recommendations from the National Science and Technology Council. Additionally, a briefing to Congress is required to outline the development of these policies, ensuring that DHS is taking adequate measures to safeguard its research endeavors.
Significant Issues
One significant issue presented by the bill is the lack of specific metrics or mechanisms for measuring the effectiveness of the new safeguarding policy. Without clear metrics, it might be challenging to evaluate whether the policy successfully prevents unauthorized access to sensitive information.
Another concern is related to the required report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) regarding compliance with existing national security directives. The bill does not specify baseline data or previous performance metrics, which could complicate the evaluation of DHS’s progress or compliance over time.
The bill's requirement for a Congressional briefing also lacks defined outcomes or goals, which could result in a presentation that doesn't provide actionable or specific information for Congressional oversight. Moreover, the language describing the involvement of "appropriate agency officials" in policy development is vague, potentially leading to ambiguities in coordination and efficiency.
Lastly, the addition of a new paragraph to Section 302 of the Homeland Security Act might create overlap or redundancy with existing security policies unless carefully aligned.
Broad Impact on the Public
On a broader scale, the bill aims to bolster the security of critical research and development activities within DHS, which could enhance national security and protect technological advances from espionage or unauthorized access. For the public, this could mean greater confidence in the security of innovations and advancements that arise from DHS research initiatives.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For stakeholders within DHS, the bill introduces new obligations and the necessity to implement and adhere to additional security protocols, which might require increased resources and coordination among various departments. If effectively implemented, these policies could secure stakeholders' research investments and intellectual properties.
Outside of DHS, universities and research institutions that collaborate on DHS projects might face stricter compliance requirements, potentially impacting their operational procedures. However, these measures could benefit these institutions by safeguarding their collaborative research outputs.
In summary, while the bill's intentions align with strengthening research security, its success relies heavily on the effectiveness of its implementation and the clarity with which its procedures and metrics are established. Addressing the identified issues will be crucial in ensuring that the bill's objectives are met without creating unnecessary burdens or inefficiencies.
Issues
The bill amends Section 302 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to include a new policy on safeguarding research and development. However, it does not specify any clear metrics or mechanisms for assessing the effectiveness of this policy, which could lead to challenges in evaluating its success or failure. (Section 2)
The requirement for a GAO report on compliance with NSPM–33 and the adoption of guidance from the National Science and Technology Council is critical, but the text does not provide any baseline for comparison or previous performance metrics. This could hinder the assessment of whether the Department has improved or maintained compliance over time. (Section 2, subsection b)
The bill mandates a briefing to Congress regarding policy development for safeguarding research and development, but it does not specify any specific outcomes or goals that this briefing is supposed to achieve. This lack of specificity may result in a briefing that is not sufficiently actionable or informative for Congressional oversight. (Section 2, subsection c)
The language used to describe coordination with 'appropriate agency officials' is vague and does not specify which officials or departments are to be involved in developing the safeguarding policy. This could lead to ambiguity and inefficiencies in coordination and execution of the policy. (Section 2)
The new paragraph (15) added to Section 302 may lead to inconsistencies or overlap with existing sensitive information security policies unless properly aligned. This could cause redundancy or conflict in policy implementation, impacting the overall efficiency of safeguarding measures. (Section 2)
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The short title of this Act is the “Research Security and Accountability in DHS Act.”
2. Safeguarding sensitive research in the Department of Homeland Security Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill section amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to add a policy for protecting sensitive research information from unauthorized access. It also requires a report from the Comptroller General about compliance with national security guidelines and a briefing to Congress on these new policies within set deadlines.