The bill requires the Secretary of Energy and the Director of the National Science Foundation to carry out cross-cutting collaborative research and development activities that align DOE mission priorities with NSF-funded basic research. It directs the agencies to formalize coordination through an interagency agreement or memorandum of understanding that mandates a competitive, merit-reviewed selection process open to federal agencies, national laboratories, institutions of higher education, nonprofits, and other eligible entities.
The statute enumerates technical focus areas — from plasma and fusion science to computational neuroscience, AI/ML for energy and climate, quantum information science, advanced manufacturing, microelectronics, and high energy physics — and authorizes the agencies to support infrastructure, data sharing, workforce training, and reimbursable agreements. It also requires a joint report within two years to specified House and Senate committees and ties all activity to existing federal research-security rules (subtitle D of title VI of the Research and Development, Competition, and Innovation Act).
At a Glance
What It Does
Directs DOE and NSF to implement joint, cross-cutting R&D via a memorandum of understanding or similar interagency agreement that requires competitive, merit-reviewed awards and allows reimbursable agreements and collaboration with other federal agencies. It authorizes support for research infrastructure, data-sharing platforms, and STEM workforce initiatives.
Who It Affects
Directly affects the Department of Energy, the National Science Foundation, national laboratories, institutions of higher education, nonprofit research organizations, and other federal agencies that apply, partner, or host projects. It also affects program managers, grant administrators, and entities that operate or require access to shared research infrastructure and secure data transfer.
Why It Matters
This creates an explicit mechanism to bridge DOE’s mission-driven capabilities and NSF’s basic-research ecosystem, potentially lowering barriers to multi-disciplinary projects and shared facilities. For compliance officers and partnership leads, it reshapes how joint solicitations, security vetting, and cost-reimbursable arrangements will be structured.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The statute makes the Secretary of Energy and the NSF Director jointly responsible for pursuing collaborative R&D that serves both agencies’ priorities. They must document that relationship in a memorandum of understanding or comparable interagency agreement; the agreement must require a competitive, merit-reviewed process that considers applications from a broad set of entities, including federal agencies, national labs, universities, nonprofits, and others the agencies deem appropriate.
The bill specifies a non-exhaustive list of technical focus areas—basic plasma science (with applications to fusion and accelerators), computational and biological sciences including neuromorphic computing, AI/ML and predictive analytics targeted to energy and climate problems, quantum information science, energy and materials research such as artificial photosynthesis and fusion-relevant materials, advanced manufacturing aimed at energy efficiency, microelectronics, and advanced/high-energy physics. Several listed items explicitly point to existing statutory programs (for example, provisions of the Department of Energy Research and Innovation Act and the National Quantum Initiative Act), signaling that the joint activities should build on established DOE and NSF efforts rather than start from scratch.Operationally, the bill authorizes tools to execute collaboration: the agencies may run collaborative research projects, promote open community-based development and data sharing (while providing the necessary secure transfer capabilities), support facilities and equipment upgrades, and create education and workforce-development programs including internships, fellowships, and educator professional development.
It also permits reimbursable agreements between DOE, NSF, and other entities, and authorizes coordination with other federal agencies when appropriate. The statute does not itself appropriate funds or amend existing authorization levels, so implementation will rely on available appropriations and program budgets unless Congress provides new funding.Finally, the bill establishes a two-year reporting obligation: the Secretary and the Director must report to specific House and Senate committees on interagency coordination, opportunities to expand technical capabilities, collaborative achievements, prospective areas for future cooperation, and whether and how the coordination activities will continue.
All activities must be conducted consistent with the research-security framework in subtitle D of title VI of the Research and Development, Competition, and Innovation Act (42 U.S.C. 19231 et seq.), which carries implications for vetting, foreign affiliations, and information protection.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The statute requires DOE and NSF to formalize coordination through a memorandum of understanding or similar interagency agreement that mandates a competitive, merit-reviewed selection process.
The agencies must consider applications from federal agencies, National Laboratories, institutions of higher education, nonprofit institutions, and other appropriate entities in that competitive process.
The bill lists explicit technical focus areas—plasma and fusion science, computational/biological sciences and neuromorphic computing, AI/ML and large-scale data analytics for energy and climate, quantum information science, energy/materials research (including artificial photosynthesis and fusion), advanced manufacturing, microelectronics, and advanced physics.
DOE and NSF are authorized to enter reimbursable agreements, collaborate with other federal agencies, support new facilities and equipment, and run workforce-development programs (internships, fellowships, educator development).
The agencies must submit a joint report within two years to designated House and Senate committees detailing coordination activities, capability gaps, collaborative outcomes, future areas of cooperation, and plans to continue coordination; all work must comply with the research-security provisions of 42 U.S.C. 19231 et seq.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Establishes the act’s official name as the "DOE and NSF Interagency Research Act." This is a purely formal provision, but it signals congressional intent that DOE–NSF collaboration is a discrete legislative priority.
Mandate for joint R&D activities
Directs the Secretary of Energy and the NSF Director to carry out cross-cutting and collaborative research and development activities explicitly focused on advancing both agencies’ mission requirements and priorities. That language creates a statutory obligation to align efforts rather than an optional pilot, giving agency leadership a clear legal hook for creating joint programs or solicitations.
Memorandum of understanding and merit review
Requires the agencies to coordinate via a memorandum of understanding or other interagency agreement that must require a competitive, merit-reviewed process. The provision explicitly lists the types of applicants the process must consider—federal agencies, national labs, universities, nonprofits, and other appropriate entities—thereby setting an inclusive eligibility baseline and signaling that both applied mission programs and basic-research actors should be able to compete.
Scope of coordination and technical focus areas
Provides a broad but specific menu of permissible activities and technical focus areas. The agencies may pursue collaborative research across areas such as plasma and fusion science, computational biological sciences and neuromorphic computing, AI/ML and data assimilation for energy/climate, quantum information science, energy and materials research (including artificial photosynthesis), advanced manufacturing, microelectronics, and high-energy/particle physics. The section also authorizes support for open community-based development, secure data sharing, infrastructure investments, and STEM workforce programs.
Agreements and interagency cooperation
Authorizes reimbursable agreements between DOE, NSF, and other entities to maximize R&D effectiveness and explicitly allows collaboration with other federal agencies. Mechanically this permits the agencies to structure cost-recovery or cost-sharing arrangements and to use federal partners’ capabilities, but the bill does not prescribe cost-share formulas or administrative details—those will be left to implementing agreements.
Two-year report to authorizing committees
Requires the Secretary and Director to deliver a report not later than two years after enactment to the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee and to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources and Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committees. The report must cover interagency coordination, technical capability opportunities, collaborative achievements, future areas for cooperation, and the plan for continuing coordination—creating a near-term congressional oversight checkpoint.
Research-security compliance
Mandates that all activities authorized by the section be conducted consistent with subtitle D of title VI of the Research and Development, Competition, and Innovation Act (42 U.S.C. 19231 et seq.). That cross-reference imports existing federal research-security obligations—covering vetting, foreign-affiliation disclosures, and other protections—into joint DOE–NSF projects without recasting the substantive security framework.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Science across all five countries.
Explore Science in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- National Laboratories — Gain clearer pathways to participate in joint solicitations, increased access to NSF-funded basic-research collaborations, and potential support for facility upgrades that span DOE mission work and NSF science.
- Universities and non-profit research organizations — Can compete in a merit-reviewed pool that explicitly includes them, improving chances to partner on projects that link basic science with DOE’s applied infrastructure.
- Early-career researchers and students — Stand to benefit from authorized internships, fellowships, and experiential STEM programming that the agencies are directed to organize and expand.
- Industry and startups in quantum, AI, microelectronics, and clean-energy sectors — May obtain access to shared infrastructure, datasets, and collaborative development environments created under the interagency activities.
- DOE and NSF program managers — Receive a statutory mechanism to coordinate solicitations, share facilities and data, and align technical roadmaps across agencies, which can leverage complementary strengths.
Who Bears the Cost
- Department of Energy and National Science Foundation — Face administrative and program-management burdens to negotiate and implement the MOU, stand up joint solicitations, and manage reimbursable agreements; absent new appropriations, they must reallocate existing program funds.
- National Laboratories and host institutions — May incur compliance and cost-share obligations when participating in reimbursable agreements or upgrading facilities to meet joint program needs.
- Other federal agencies that participate — Will need to commit staff time, possibly resources, and adhere to the joint merit-review process and research-security requirements.
- Grantees and award recipients — Must comply with joint program terms, potentially stricter security vetting, data-sharing rules, and administrative requirements tied to interagency collaboration.
- Data and facility operators — Bear upfront costs to deploy secure data-transfer capabilities, community-based development platforms, and systems to meet the security and openness objectives simultaneously.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is reconciling NSF’s culture of open, curiosity-driven basic research with DOE’s mission-driven, infrastructure-heavy, and security-sensitive programs: the bill tries to create joint activity that is both open and secure, basic and applied, collaborative across many actors yet accountable to mission priorities—tensions that require trade-offs in governance, funding, and data-sharing policies.
The statute creates an operational framework but leaves key implementation choices to DOE and NSF. It requires a competitive, merit-reviewed process and an interagency agreement, but it does not specify governance structures for decision-making, who sets technical priorities inside the joint program, or how to resolve conflicts when agency missions diverge.
The absence of an express authorization of appropriations means agencies will either rely on existing program funds or seek new appropriations to scale collaborative activities; that makes the two-year report a likely battleground for resource requests.
The bill also imports the research-security regime from 42 U.S.C. 19231 et seq., which protects against undue foreign influence and other risks. That creates a tension with the bill’s parallel call for open, community-based development and broad inclusion of participants.
Implementers will need to craft policies that allow data and code sharing and inter-institutional collaboration while applying affiliation vetting and access controls. Practical questions remain about intellectual-property rules and technology-transfer pathways when projects mix NSF-style basic research and DOE-driven applied outcomes, as well as about how reimbursable agreements will be priced and audited across agencies.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.