10 U.S. Code § 2359 - Science and technology programs to be conducted so as to foster the transition of science and technology to higher levels of research, development, test, and evaluation

(a) Policy.— Each official specified in subsection (b) shall ensure that the management and conduct of the science and technology programs under the authority of that official are carried out in a manner that will foster the transition of science and technology to higher levels of research, development, test, and evaluation.
(b) Covered Officials.— Subsection (a) applies to the following officials of the Department of Defense:
(1) The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics.
(2) The Secretary of each military department.
(3) The Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.
(4) The directors and heads of other offices and agencies of the Department of Defense with assigned research, development, test, and evaluation responsibilities.

Source

(Added Pub. L. 106–398, § 1 [[div. A], title IX, § 904(a)(1)], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654, 1654A–225.)
Prior Provisions

A prior section 2359, added Pub. L. 96–107, title VIII, § 819(a)(1),Nov. 9, 1979, 93 Stat. 818, related to reports on salaries of officers of Federal contract research centers, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title XIII, § 1322(a)(5),Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1671.
Proof of Concept Commercialization Pilot Program

Pub. L. 113–66, div. A, title XVI, § 1603,Dec. 26, 2013, 127 Stat. 944, provided that:
“(a) Pilot Program.—The Secretary of Defense, acting through the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, may establish and implement a pilot program, to be known as the ‘Proof of Concept Commercialization Pilot Program’, in accordance with this section.
“(b) Purpose.—The purpose of the pilot program is to accelerate the commercialization of basic research innovations from qualifying institutions.
“(c) Awards.—
“(1) In general.—Under the pilot program, the Secretary shall make financial awards to qualifying institutions in accordance with this subsection.
“(2) Competitive, merit-based process.—An award under the pilot program shall be made using a competitive, merit-based process.
“(3) Eligibility.—A qualifying institution shall be eligible for an award under the pilot program if the institution agrees to—
“(A) use funds from the award for the uses specified in paragraph (5); and
“(B) oversee the use of the funds through—
“(i) a rigorous, diverse review board comprised of experts in translational and proof of concept research, including industry, start-up, venture capital, technical, financial, and business experts and university technology transfer officials;
“(ii) technology validation milestones focused on market feasibility;
“(iii) simple reporting on program progress; and
“(iv) a process to reallocate funding from poor performing projects to those with more potential.
“(4) Criteria.—An award may be made under the pilot program to a qualifying institution in accordance with the following criteria:
“(A) The extent to which a qualifying institution—
“(i) has an established and proven technology transfer or commercialization office and has a plan for engaging that office in the program’s implementation or has outlined an innovative approach to technology transfer that has the potential to increase or accelerate technology transfer outcomes and can be adopted by other qualifying institutions;
“(ii) can assemble a project management board comprised of industry, start-up, venture capital, technical, financial, and business experts;
“(iii) has an intellectual property rights strategy or office; and
“(iv) demonstrates a plan for sustainability beyond the duration of the funding from the award.
“(B) Such other criteria as the Secretary determines necessary.
“(5) Use of award.—
“(A) In general.—Subject to subparagraph (B), the funds from an award may be used to evaluate the commercial potential of existing discoveries, including activities that contribute to determining a project’s commercialization path, including technical validations, market research, clarifying intellectual property rights, and investigating commercial and business opportunities.
“(B) Limitations.—
“(i) The amount of an award may not exceed $500,000 a year.
“(ii) Funds from an award may not be used for basic research, or to fund the acquisition of research equipment or supplies unrelated to commercialization activities.
“(d) Report.—Not later than one year after the establishment of the pilot program, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] and to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report evaluating the effectiveness of the activities of the pilot program. The report shall include—
“(1) a detailed description of the pilot program, including incentives and activities undertaken by review board experts;
“(2) an accounting of the funds used in the pilot program;
“(3) a detailed description of the institutional selection process;
“(4) a detailed compilation of results achieved by the pilot program; and
“(5) an analysis of the program’s effectiveness, with data supporting the analysis.
“(e) Qualifying Institution Defined.—In this section, the term ‘qualifying institution’ means a nonprofit institution, as defined in section 4(3) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3703 (3)), or a Federal laboratory, as defined in section 4(4) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3703 (4)).
“(f) Limitation.—Not more than $5,000,000 may be obligated or expended to conduct the pilot program under this section.
“(g) Termination.—The pilot program conducted under this section shall terminate on September 30, 2018.”
Defense Research and Development Rapid Innovation Program

Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title X, § 1073,Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4366, provided that:
“(a) Program Established.—The Secretary of Defense shall establish a competitive, merit-based program to accelerate the fielding of technologies developed pursuant to phase II Small Business Innovation Research Program projects, technologies developed by the defense laboratories, and other innovative technologies (including dual use technologies). The purpose of this program is to stimulate innovative technologies and reduce acquisition or lifecycle costs, address technical risks, improve the timeliness and thoroughness of test and evaluation outcomes, and rapidly insert such products directly in support of primarily major defense acquisition programs, but also other defense acquisition programs that meet critical national security needs.
“(b) Guidelines.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 7, 2011], the Secretary shall issue guidelines for the operation of the program. At a minimum such guidance shall provide for the following:
“(1) The issuance of an annual broad agency announcement or the use of any other competitive or merit-based processes by the Department of Defense and by each military department for candidate proposals in direct support of primarily major defense acquisition programs, but also other defense acquisition programs as described in subsection (a).
“(2) The review of candidate proposals by the Department of Defense and by each military department and the merit-based selection of the most promising cost-effective proposals for funding through contracts, cooperative agreements, and other transactions for the purposes of carrying out the program.
“(3) The total amount of funding provided to any project under the program shall not exceed $3,000,000, unless the Secretary, or the Secretary’s designee, approves a larger amount of funding for the project. Any such approval shall be made on a case-by-case basis and notice of any such approval shall be submitted to the congressional defense committees [Committees on Armed Services and Appropriations of the Senate and the House of Representatives] by not later than 30 days after such approval is made.
“(4) No project shall be funded under the program for more than two years, unless the Secretary, or the Secretary’s designee, approves funding for any additional year. Any such approval shall be made on a case-by-case basis and notice of any such approval shall be submitted to the congressional defense committees by not later than 30 days after such approval is made.
“(c) Treatment Pursuant to Certain Congressional Rules.—Nothing in this section shall be interpreted to require or enable any official of the Department of Defense to provide funding under this section to any earmark as defined pursuant to House Rule XXI, clause 9, or any congressionally directed spending item as defined pursuant to Senate Rule XLIV, paragraph 5.
“(d) Funding.—Subject to the availability of appropriations for such purpose, the amounts authorized to be appropriated for research, development, test, and evaluation for each of fiscal years 2011 through 2015 may be used for any such fiscal year for the program established under subsection (a).
“(e) Transfer Authority.—The Secretary may transfer funds available for the program to the research, development, test, and evaluation accounts of a military department, defense agency, or the unified combatant command for special operations forces pursuant to a proposal, or any part of a proposal, that the Secretary determines would directly support the purposes of the program. The transfer authority provided in this subsection is in addition to any other transfer authority available to the Department of Defense.
“(f) Report.—Not later than 60 days after the last day of a fiscal year during which the Secretary carries out a program under this section, the Secretary shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report that includes a list and description of each project funded under this section, including, for each such project, the amount of funding provided for the project, the defense acquisition program that the project supports, including the extent to which the project meets needs identified in its acquisition plan, the anticipated timeline for transition for the project, and the degree to which a competitive, merit-based process was used to evaluate and select the performers of the projects selected under this program.
“(g) Termination.—The authority to carry out a program under this section shall terminate on September 30, 2015. Any amounts made available for the program that remain available for obligation on the date the program terminates may be transferred under subsection (e) during the 180-day period beginning on the date of the termination of the program.”

 

LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII.