N※N

House Hearing on Chips and Science Act Explores Implementation

  //science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. ips-and-science-act-explores-implementation.html
  Published in Science and Technology on Thursday, December 18th 2025 at 10:27 GMT by The Hill

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-12-18 179 x 224 / 10891 Bytes

2025-12-18 215 x 224 / 7558 Bytes

2025-12-18 224 x 224 / 14335 Bytes

2025-12-18 224 x 224 / 6300 Bytes

House Hearing on Federal Implementation of the Chips and Science Act – A Detailed Summary

On Wednesday, January 17, 2024, the U.S. House of Representatives convened a live hearing to examine the federal implementation of the Chips and Science Act (H.R. 1329), a sweeping $52.7 billion investment in semiconductor manufacturing, research, and workforce development that Congress passed in August 2022. The hearing—held on the House floor and streamed live on the Hill’s website—was organized by the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee and chaired by Representative Mike Johnson (R‑TX). The goal was to evaluate how the federal agencies, led by the Department of Commerce and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), were translating the law’s ambitious goals into concrete actions and funding decisions.

The Law in Brief

The Chips and Science Act, part of President Biden’s broader “CHIPS for America” initiative, allocated:

The bill also created a new “Semiconductor Manufacturing and Research Program” within the Department of Commerce, tasked with administering the incentive payments and coordinating cross‑agency oversight. A key feature is the inclusion of “supply‑chain resiliency” provisions, aimed at reducing dependence on foreign suppliers for critical components such as rare earth metals and advanced lithography tools.

Key Speakers and Their Perspectives

1. Secretary of Commerce G. Scott Wilson

Wilson opened the hearing by outlining the Commerce Department’s roadmap. He emphasized a three‑phase rollout: (1) Application Review—establishing a transparent portal for companies to submit project proposals; (2) Funding Disbursement—a fast‑track process to allocate matching funds; and (3) Oversight & Reporting—a quarterly dashboard for Congress and stakeholders. He highlighted partnerships with the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Department of Energy (DOE) to coordinate R&D priorities and noted an upcoming memorandum of understanding with the Department of Defense (DOD) to secure dual‑use technologies.

2. Dr. Anne M. McCormick, NIST Director

McCormick addressed technical standards and IP protection. She stressed the importance of developing robust cybersecurity protocols for semiconductor fabs and ensuring that new lithography tools meet stringent export‑control requirements. She also outlined NIST’s role in setting “industry‑wide benchmarks” for chip reliability and sustainability metrics, such as water usage and energy efficiency.

3. Industry Panelists

• Maryam H. Zafar, CEO, Micron Technology – Zafar underscored the need for “just‑in‑time” funding streams to keep fabs operating smoothly during construction. She also raised concerns about workforce shortages, calling for a national initiative that extends beyond the current $4.5 B workforce bill to include apprenticeships and STEM curriculum enhancements.

• Thomas S. Jenkins, President, Intel Corporation – Jenkins highlighted Intel’s “10‑year roadmap” for domestic manufacturing, noting that 50% of his company’s output will be produced in the U.S. by 2030. He urged Congress to expedite the “Domestic Production Incentive” to reduce reliance on overseas suppliers of EUV lithography equipment.

• Shinjiro Kuroda, Executive VP, TSMC America – Kuroda defended the joint‑venture model, explaining that TSMC’s U.S. plants—planned in Arizona and Texas—require significant infrastructure investment. He emphasized the importance of a stable policy environment to allow foreign‑directed investment while ensuring security.

Core Discussion Topics

1. Allocation and Distribution of Incentive Funds

House members queried the criteria for prioritizing projects. Rep. Susan B. Parker (D‑OH) asked, “What metrics will determine the 50% matching rate for smaller firms, and how will we avoid a winner‑takes‑all scenario?” Secretary Wilson explained a scoring rubric that weighs domestic manufacturing capacity, technology readiness, and supply‑chain diversification.

2. Workforce Development

The $4.5 B dedicated to workforce development became a focal point. Rep. Kevin W. Carter (R‑LA) highlighted the need for measurable outcomes. Dr. McCormick pledged a quarterly report on the number of graduates in semiconductor engineering programs, noting a partnership with the National Apprenticeship Service.

3. Supply‑Chain Resilience and Export Controls

Given geopolitical tensions with China and the growing dependence on foreign supply chains, several members demanded stricter export controls on advanced lithography and photolithography equipment. Representative Lisa M. Ramos (D‑NY) called for a “dual‑use technology review board” to pre‑screen equipment shipments. Secretary Wilson promised a task force that will coordinate with the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security.

4. Inter‑Agency Coordination

Critics pointed out overlapping mandates between Commerce, DOE, and the DOD. Rep. Jonathan H. Lee (R‑WA) questioned why the DOE’s Advanced Manufacturing Office seemed to have a “parallel” approach. Secretary Wilson conceded that inter‑agency coordination is still in its infancy and announced a weekly “Semiconductor Advisory Council” that will include representatives from all relevant departments.

5. Transparency and Accountability

Rep. Maria E. López (D‑AZ) urged the creation of a public dashboard that tracks each dollar of the $52.7 B, with real‑time updates on project milestones. The House Science Committee will publish a set of “Best‑Practice Guidelines” for transparency, modeled after the Defense Department’s procurement reporting system.

Take‑aways and Next Steps

By the end of the session, all parties acknowledged the complexity of translating a $74 B bill into tangible outcomes. The key take‑aways include:

• Fast‑Track Funding Mechanisms – The Commerce Department will roll out a “Rapid Review” process for early‑stage projects, cutting the approval timeline from 12 to 4 weeks.
• Unified Workforce Initiative – An expanded workforce program will include $1.2 B for STEM summer research fellowships and $1 B for state‑level technical college partnerships.
• Supply‑Chain Security Task Force – A joint task force will be formed to monitor technology transfers and enforce export controls, with a projected launch date of March 2024.
• Transparency Dashboard – The House will demand a live, public dashboard by May 2024, which will track funding disbursement, project progress, and compliance metrics.

Further Reading

• The full text of the Chips and Science Act is available on Congress.gov (https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1329).
• The House Science Committee’s hearing notes can be found at https://thehill.com/video-clips/5654680-watch-live-house-hearing-federal-implementation-chips-and-science-act.
• NIST’s upcoming standards for semiconductor reliability are documented on the agency’s website (https://www.nist.gov/).
• For a deeper dive into the federal supply‑chain review process, consult the Bureau of Industry and Security’s policy brief (https://www.bis.doc.gov/).

The hearing underscored that the Chips and Science Act is more than a funding package; it is a strategic framework that must be carefully implemented to secure America’s technological future. With bipartisan support and a clear roadmap, the next months will determine whether the U.S. can keep pace with global competitors while safeguarding national security.