PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 9, 2002
Technology Administration and National Institute of Standards and Technology Act of 2002 - Authorizes appropriations for FY 2003 through 2005 to the Secretary of Commerce for: (1) activities of the Under Secretary for Technology and the Office of Technology Policy; (2) the Scientific and Technical Research and Services laboratory activities of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST); (3) the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award program; (4) NIST facilities construction and maintenance; and (5) NIST Industrial Technology Services activities.Amends the National Institute of Standards and Technology Act concerning the Advanced Technology Program (ATP) to: (1) authorize the participation of universities and nonprofit organizations in ATP joint ventures; (2) allow vesting of intellectual property developed in a joint venture in any participant; (3) prohibit ATP contracts from being awarded unless they may remove a scientific or technological barrier to product development; and (4) allow the use of industry and peer review of project proposals.Enterprise Integration Act of 2002 - Requires the Director to establish an initiative for advancing enterprise integration within the United States. Provides for related assessments, plans and reports, and authorized initiative activities.Fair Play in Sports Act of 2002 - Directs NIST to: (1) establish a research program for testing performance-enhancing substances the use of which is prohibited in the Olympic Games; (2) provide peer review and assistance to the United States Anti-Doping Agency with respect to the laboratory accreditation process and testing procedures delineated in the International Olympic Committee's Olympic Movement Anti-Doping Code; and (3) establish a research program on the long-term consequences of the use of performance-enhancing substances.
People & committees
Rep. Barcia, James A. [D-MI-5] · D–MI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards.
Referred to the House Committee on Science.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1222)
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: Aug 19, 2025. 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.5074 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.5074 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.5074 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.5074 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.