PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Small Business, and in addition to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Mejia, Analilia [D-NJ-11] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Small Business, and in addition to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Small Business, and in addition to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 25, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10343 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10343 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10343 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10343 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-09-10 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposal would establish a process for eligible small businesses denied federal awards under the SBIR and STTR programs to request more detailed feedback. They would receive an assessment of significant proposal weaknesses, their ranking against other proposals, and reasons for denial. Businesses could ask follow-up questions, which the federal agency would have to answer within a set deadline. Some denial reasons would be excluded.
establish a process to provide enhanced debriefing materials to each small business concern denied a Phase I, Phase II, or Phase III award for a reason other a reason listed in paragraph (16)
establish a process to provide enhanced debriefing materials to each small business concern denied a Phase I, Phase II, or Phase III award for a reason other a reason listed in paragraph (20)
(B) provides such concern an evaluation by the Federal agency of the significant deficiencies in the concern’s proposal, an overall ranking of the concern’s proposal in relation to all other proposals, and a summary of the rationale for denial of the award; (C) an opportunity for such concern to submit, within 7 business days after receiving such enhanced debriefing materials, additional questions related to the debriefing; and (D) terminates when the Federal agency submits answers to the questions received under subparagraph (C), which shall be within 14 business days after receipt of such questions.
(B) provides such concern an evaluation by the Federal agency of the significant deficiencies in the concern’s proposal, an overall ranking of the concern’s proposal in relation to all other proposals, and a summary of the rationale for denial of the award; (C) an opportunity for such concern to submit, within 7 business days after receiving such enhanced debriefing materials, additional questions related to the debriefing; and (D) terminates when the Federal agency submits answers to the questions received under subparagraph (C), which shall be within 14 business days after receipt of such questions.
Section 1 would name the bill the Clear Lessons and Evaluation for Award Reviews Feedback Act, or CLEAR Feedback Act.
This Act may be cited as the Clear Lessons and Evaluation for Award Reviews Feedback Act or the CLEAR Feedback Act.
Sections 2 and 3 would add parallel feedback requirements to the Small Business Act for SBIR and STTR award denials. Both would cover Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III awards, with exceptions for denial reasons listed in existing paragraphs that are not reproduced in the bundle.
2. Enhanced debriefing materials for SBIR award denials Section 9(g) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(g)) is amended—
(20) establish a process to provide enhanced debriefing materials to each small business concern denied a Phase I, Phase II, or Phase III award for a reason other a reason listed in paragraph (16)
3. Enhanced debriefing materials for STTR award denials Section 9(o) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 638(o)) is amended—
(24) establish a process to provide enhanced debriefing materials to each small business concern denied a Phase I, Phase II, or Phase III award for a reason other a reason listed in paragraph (20)
For both programs, the proposed feedback process would begin at the business's request no later than 14 business days after the award denial.
(A) is initiated upon request by such concern not later than 14 business days after denial of the award;
(A) is initiated upon request by such concern not later than 14 business days after denial of the award;
The proposed feedback materials would include the federal agency's evaluation of significant weaknesses in the business's proposal, its overall ranking against all other proposals, and a summary explaining the denial.
(B) provides such concern an evaluation by the Federal agency of the significant deficiencies in the concern’s proposal, an overall ranking of the concern’s proposal in relation to all other proposals, and a summary of the rationale for denial of the award;
(B) provides such concern an evaluation by the Federal agency of the significant deficiencies in the concern’s proposal, an overall ranking of the concern’s proposal in relation to all other proposals, and a summary of the rationale for denial of the award;
Under both proposed processes, the business would have seven business days after receiving the feedback materials to submit additional questions about the feedback.
(C) an opportunity for such concern to submit, within 7 business days after receiving such enhanced debriefing materials, additional questions related to the debriefing;
(C) an opportunity for such concern to submit, within 7 business days after receiving such enhanced debriefing materials, additional questions related to the debriefing;
The federal agency would have to answer those questions within 14 business days of receiving them. Each proposed feedback process would end when the agency submitted its answers.
(D) terminates when the Federal agency submits answers to the questions received under subparagraph (C), which shall be within 14 business days after receipt of such questions.
(D) terminates when the Federal agency submits answers to the questions received under subparagraph (C), which shall be within 14 business days after receipt of such questions.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated September 25, 2026, records introduction in the House on September 10, 2026, and referral that day to the Small Business Committee and the Science, Space, and Technology Committee for provisions within their respective jurisdictions.
Source snapshot updated 2026-09-25T08:06:38Z.
2026-09-10: Introduced in House
2026-09-10: Referred to the Committee on Small Business, and in addition to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-10. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. Coverage of the feedback process's intended beneficiaries does not by itself constitute a targeted benefit. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Sep 25, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI