PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Apr 26, 2005
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on April 12, 2005. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
High-Performance Computing Revitalization Act of 2005 - Amends the High-performance Computing Act of 1991 to direct the President to implement a High-performance Computing Research and Development Program (current law provides for a National High-performance Computing Program) and revise program requirements.
Requires the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to: (1) establish the goals and priorities for Federal high-performance computing research, development, networking, and other activities; (2) establish Program Component Areas that implement such goals and identify the Grand Challenges (i.e., fundamental problems in science or engineering, with broad economic and scientific impact, whose solutions will require the application of high-performance computing resources) that the Program should address; and (3) develop and maintain a research, development, and deployment road map for the provision of high-performance computing systems.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Revises requirements for annual reports by requiring that such reports: (1) describe Program Component Areas, including any changes in the definition of or activities under such Areas and the reasons for such changes, and describe Grand Challenges supported under the Program; (2) describe the levels of Federal funding and the levels proposed for each Program Component Area; (3) describe the levels of Federal funding for each agency and department participating in the Program for each such Area; and (4) include an analysis of the extent to which the Program incorporates the recommendations of the advisory committee on high-performance computing. Eliminates the requirement that such reports include reports from the Secretary of Energy on Department of Energy activities taken to carry out the National High-performance Computing Program.
Requires such advisory committee to: (1) provide the Director with an independent assessment of the balance between components of the Program, including funding levels for the Program Component Areas and whether the research and development undertaken pursuant to the Program is helping to maintain U.S. leadership in high-performance computing and networking; and (2) conduct periodic evaluations of the funding, management, coordination, implementation, and activities of the Program, and report at least once every two fiscal years to specified congressional committees.
Requires the Office of Management and Budget to identify each element of its high-performance computing activities which contributes directly to the Program Component Areas or benefits from the Program.
Repeals requirements under the Act for the National Research and Education Network and the Next Generation Internet.
Modifies provisions regarding responsibilities of the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Department of Energy (DOE), the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
People & committees
Rep. Biggert, Judy [R-IL-13] · R–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2483-2484)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H2483-2484)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 28.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2483-2487)
Mrs. Biggert moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 17.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science. H. Rept. 109-36.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Science. H. Rept. 109-36.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on Science.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E26)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 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.28 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.28 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.28 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.28 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.