PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 526.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Sep 23, 2024
Accelerating Networking, Cyberinfrastructure, and Hardware for Oceanic Research Act or the ANCHOR Act
This bill requires the National Science Foundation (NSF) to develop a plan to improve the cybersecurity and telecommunications of the U.S. Academic Research Fleet (ARF). The plan must be provided to Congress within one year after the bill is enacted.
ARF is comprised of U.S.-flagged vessels that provide at-sea laboratories where oceanographic scientists, educators, and students research and learn about marine science.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill requires a plan to include assessments of (1) telecommunications and networking needs of ARF, consistent with typical scientific missions; (2) cybersecurity needs appropriate for the ownership of ARF vessels and their typical functions; (3) the costs necessary to meet these needs; and (4) the time required to implement necessary upgrades. The plan must also include a spending plan and a proposal for adopting common solutions, consortial licensing agreements, or a solution for centralizing cybersecurity, telecommunications, and data systems at a single facility.
Among other factors specified in the bill, the NSF must consider approaches to align with international standards for encryption of sensitive information, requirements for controlled classified or unclassified information, and the network capabilities necessary to meet particular mission needs (such as to upload data to shoreside servers or to enable video communications with K-12 classrooms).
The NSF must provide Congress with a report on the plan's implementation within two years after the plan is provided to Congress.
People & committees
Rep. Garcia, Mike [R-CA-27] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 526.
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 H5629-5630)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5629-5630)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 7630.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5629-5631)
Mr. Lucas moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 433.
Reported by the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. H. Rept. 118-521.
Reported by the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. H. Rept. 118-521.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 38 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Feb 2, 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.7630 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.7630 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.7630 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.7630 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.