Our bill on citizen science (that started with my briefing the awesome AAAS fellow Rose Mutiso in Sen Coons’ office in early 2014) was incorporated into the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act (COMPETES) (see Sec 402), and is now on its way for signing by the President.
Full Text (see also section 402 pasted below)
Thanks to citizen science champions Sen Coons, Rose Mutiso, Allison Schwier and Franz, to Darlene Cavalier and the American Chemical Society for helping to organize subsequent congressional briefings, to Jenn Gustetic who helped from her position at OSTP, and to Sophia Liu, Amy Kaminski, John McLaughlin, Ellen McCallie, Jennifer Couch, Jay Benforado and other CCS federal staff and CSA members who offered their technical expertise to inform congressional staff’s efforts (through *multiple* rounds of review and comments).
(a) Short Title.—This section may be cited as the “Crowdsourcing and Citizen Science Act”.
(1) the authority granted to Federal agencies under the America COMPETESReauthorization Act of 2010 (Public Law 111–358; 124 Stat. 3982) to pursue the use of incentive prizes and challenges has yielded numerous benefits;
(2) crowdsourcing and citizen science projects have a number of additional unique benefits, including accelerating scientific research, increasing cost effectiveness to maximize the return on taxpayer dollars, addressing societal needs, providing hands-on learning in STEM, and connecting members of the public directly to Federal science agency missions and to each other; and
(3) granting Federal science agencies the direct, explicit authority to use crowdsourcing and citizen science will encourage its appropriate use to advance Federal science agency missions and stimulate and facilitate broader public participation in the innovation process, yielding numerous benefits to the Federal Government and citizens who participate in such projects.
(A) enabling the formulation of research questions;
(B) creating and refining project design;
(C) conducting scientific experiments;
(D) collecting and analyzing data;
(E) interpreting the results of data;
(F) developing technologies and applications;
(G) making discoveries; and
(H) solving problems.
(2) CROWDSOURCING.—The term “crowdsourcing” means a method to obtain needed services, ideas, or content by soliciting voluntary contributions from a group of individuals or organizations, especially from an online community.
(3) PARTICIPANT.—The term “participant” means any individual or other entity that has volunteered in a crowdsourcing or citizen science project under this section.
(1) IN GENERAL.—The head of each Federal science agency, or the heads of multiple Federal science agencies working cooperatively, may utilize crowdsourcing and citizen science to conduct projects designed to advance the mission of the respective Federal science agency or the joint mission of Federal science agencies, as applicable.
(2) VOLUNTARY SERVICES.—Notwithstanding section 1342 of title 31, United States Code, the head of a Federal science agency may accept, subject to regulations issued by the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, services from participants under this section if such services—
(A) are performed voluntarily as a part of a crowdsourcing or citizen science project authorized under paragraph (1);
(B) are not financially compensated for their time; and
(C) will not be used to displace any employee of the Federal Government.
(3) OUTREACH.—The head of each Federal science agency engaged in a crowdsourcing or citizen science project under this section shall make public and promote such project to encourage broad participation.
(C) MODE OF CONSENT.—A Federal agency or Federal science agencies, as applicable, may obtain consent electronically or in written form from participants under this section.
(5) PROTECTIONS FOR HUMAN SUBJECTS.—Any crowdsourcing or citizen science project under this section that involves research involving human subjects shall be subject to part 46 of title 28, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor regulation).
(A) IN GENERAL.—A Federal science agency shall, where appropriate and to the extent practicable, make data collected through a crowdsourcing or citizen science project under this section available to the public, in a machine readable format, unless prohibited by law.
(i) of the expected uses of the data compiled through the project;
(ii) if the Federal science agency will retain ownership of such data;
(iii) if and how the data and results from the project would be made available for public or third party use; and
(iv) if participants are authorized to publish such data.
(7) TECHNOLOGIES AND APPLICATIONS.—Federal science agencies shall endeavor to make technologies, applications, code, and derivations of such intellectual property developed through a crowdsourcing or citizen science project under this section available to the public.
(A) to assume any and all risks associated with such participation; and
(B) to waive all claims against the Federal Government and its related entities, except for claims based on willful misconduct, for any injury, death, damage, or loss of property, revenue, or profits (whether direct, indirect, or consequential) arising from participation in the project.
(9) RESEARCH MISCONDUCT.—Federal science agencies coordinating crowdsourcing or citizen science projects under this section shall make all practicable efforts to ensure that participants adhere to all relevant Federal research misconduct policies and other applicable ethics policies.
(10) MULTI-SECTOR PARTNERSHIPS.—The head of each Federal science agency engaged in crowdsourcing or citizen scienceunder this section, or the heads of multiple Federal science agencies working cooperatively, may enter into a contract or other agreement to share administrative duties for such projects with—
(A) a for profit or nonprofit private sector entity, including a private institution of higher education;
(B) a State, tribal, local, or foreign government agency, including a public institution of higher education; or
(C) a public-private partnership.
(11) FUNDING.—In carrying out crowdsourcing and citizen science projects under this section, the head of a Federal science agency, or the heads of multiple Federal science agencies working cooperatively—
(A) may use funds appropriated by Congress;
(i) other Federal agencies;
(ii) for profit or nonprofit private sector entities, including private institutions of higher education; or
(iii) State, tribal, local, or foreign government agencies, including public institutions of higher education; and
(C) may not give any special consideration to any entity described in subparagraph (B) in return for such funds or in-kind support.
(A) GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION ASSISTANCE.—The Administrator of the General Services Administration, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Personnel Management and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, shall, at no cost to Federal science agencies, identify and develop relevant products, training, and services to facilitate the use of crowdsourcing and citizen science projects under this section, including by specifying the appropriate contract vehicles and technology and organizational platforms to enhance the ability of Federal science agencies to carry out the projects under this section.
(i) consult any guidance provided by the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, including the Federal Crowdsourcing and Citizen Science Toolkit;
(ii) designate a coordinator for that Federal science agency’s crowdsourcing and citizen science projects; and
(iii) share best practices with other Federal agencies, including participation of staff in the Federal Community of Practice for Crowdsourcing and Citizen Science.
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall include, as a component of an annual report required under section 24(p) of the Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3719(p)), a report on the projects and activities carried out under this section.
(A) a summary of each crowdsourcing and citizen science project conducted by a Federal science agency during the most recently completed 2 fiscal years, including a description of the proposed goals of each crowdsourcing and citizen science project;
(B) an analysis of why the utilization of a crowdsourcing or citizen science project summarized in subparagraph (A) was the preferable method of achieving the goals described in subparagraph (A) as opposed to other authorities available to the Federal science agency, such as contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, and prize competitions;
(C) the participation rates, submission levels, number of consents, and any other statistic that might be considered relevant in each crowdsourcing and citizen science project;
(i) the resources, including personnel and funding, that were used in the execution of each crowdsourcing and citizen science project;
(ii) the project activities for which such resources were used; and
(iii) how the obligations and expenditures relating to the project’s execution were allocated among the accounts of the Federal science agency, including a description of the amount and source of all funds, private, public, and in-kind, contributed to each crowdsourcing and citizen science project;
(E) a summary of the use of crowdsourcing and citizen science by all Federal science agencies, including interagency and multi-sector partnerships;
(F) a description of how each crowdsourcing and citizen science project advanced the mission of each participating Federal science agency;
(G) an identification of each crowdsourcing or citizen science project where data collected through such project was not made available to the public, including the reasons for such action; and
(H) any other information that the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy considers relevant.
(1) to affect the authority to conduct crowdsourcing and citizen science authorized by any other provision of law; or
(2) to displace Federal Government resources allocated to the Federal science agencies that use crowdsourcing or citizen scienceauthorized under this section to carry out a project.
By Alex Byers, Politico’s Morning Tech, April 12, 2013
CHAFFETZ: ‘EVERY CONFIDENCE’ THAT GPS ACT WILL CLEAR COMMITTEE – Rep. Jason Chaffetz is plenty positive when it comes to whether his bill – which would require law enforcement to score a warrant before obtaining the location of your cellphone – will pass the House Judiciary panel. “…”The last thing the major carriers or hardware companies want to do is have people become afraid of their phones or other mobile devices,” he said. Chaffetz said he didn’t have an exact timeline on next steps, although your MT-er has heard rumblings for a while about a location privacy hearing later this month. Chaffetz added that he’d prefer tackling the issue as a standalone item, instead of conflating the issue with email privacy reform – the opposite of what’s been suggested by Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, chairman of the Judiciary subcommittee that will likely have jurisdiction and a co-sponsor of the GPS Act.
Space-Based Positioning Navigation and Timing (PNT) National Executive Committee, PNT Website, September 8, 2011
U.S. Government officials delivered the following testimony during a hearing of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, held September 8, 2011. The hearing focused on the scientific impacts of potential GPS interference from the terrestrial 4G network planned by LightSquared Subsidiary LLC.
For links to the testimony and video broadcast, visit Science Committee Testimony on LightSquared Interference Issue.
- Lawmakers want to block LightSquared approval (infoworld.com)
- FAA Says Even New LightSquared Plan Causes Interference (techdailydose.nationaljournal.com)
- The European Space Agency is weighing in on LightSquared potential interference with the EU’s Galileo constellation. http://apb.directionsmag.com/entry/lightsquared-update-7-20-11/190389
From Politco Magazine’s Morning Tech, June 28, 2011:
“A provision tucked into a House bill that would set the FCC‘s 2012 budget could also require the agency to speed up its investigation into Google Street View. The key paragraph, inserted with the help of Rep. Tom Graves (R-Ga.), would require the FCC to ‘report to the committee within 180 days of enactment of this act on its activities to deter, prevent and investigate allegations of privacy violations regarding the use of wireless broadband networks,’ according to the report of the financial service appropriations bill.” MORE HERE: http://politico.pro/mRtd0p
- Google Street View halted in India by police (geek.com)
Two-week measure postpones shutdown
By: David Rogers, Politico, February 25, 2011 10:29 AM EST
Threats of a government shutdown next week had all but disappeared by late Friday as Democrats reacted favorably to a Republican plan that would keep agencies operating past Mar. 4 while making a first down payment toward a larger budget deal.The two-week peace is only temporary but gives House and Senate leaders through Mar 18 to try to resolve conservative demands for more than $60 billion in spending cuts, all concentrated in the second half of this fiscal year.
For full article, visit Two-week measure postpones shutdown – POLITICO.com Print View.
POLITICO Breaking News
A high-ranking aide to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told Democratic chiefs of staff that a government shutdown is more likely than not, according to attendees. Speaking at a regular meeting of the top aides to House Democrats, Pelosi’s floor director, Jerry Hartz, offered up his assessment that the odds favor inaction before the government runs out of money, sources said. A shutdown would only happen if the House and Senate can’t reach a deal on the continuing resolution that expires on March 4.
For more information… http://www.politico.com
Panel debates ways to update surveillance to new technologies
By Juliana Gruenwald, National Journal, NextGov 02/17/2011
The FBI came to Congress Thursday to outline the problems law enforcement officials are increasingly facing in executing court ordered wiretaps, but did not offer a proposed solution for lawmakers to consider. During a hearing before the House Judiciary Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security Subcommittee, even critics acknowledged law enforcement faces a problem but there was much debate over what should be done to address it. Under the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, telecommunications companies are required to develop and deploy solutions to enable court-ordered wiretaps. …
Full article available via Panel debates ways to update surveillance to new technologies – Nextgov.
- Panel Debates Ways To Update Surveillance To New Technologies (techdailydose.nationaljournal.com)
- Newly Released Documents Detail FBI’s Plan to Expand Federal Surveillance Laws (eff.org)
- Action needed to assure new technology can be wiretapped, FBI says (cnn.com)
- FBI: Web-based Services Hurting Wiretapping Efforts (pcworld.com)
- Debate Over Internet Backdoors Heats Up in Congress and in Court (eff.org)
- FBI, DOJ and DEA Stall Release of Records on Bid to Expand Surveillance Laws (eff.org)
- FBI Pushes for Surveillance Backdoors in Web 2.0 Tools (wired.com)