§ 8301. Definitions

Section 1. Policy. It is the policy of my Administration that the United States Government should, consistent with applicable law, use terms and conditions of Federal financial assistance awards and Federal procurements to maximize the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States. The United States Government should, whenever possible, procure goods, products, materials, and services from sources that will help American businesses compete in strategic industries and help America’s workers thrive. Additionally, to promote an accountable and transparent procurement policy, each agency should vest waiver issuance authority in senior agency leadership, where appropriate and consistent with applicable law.

Sec. 2. Definitions. (a) “Agency” means any authority of the United States that is an “agency” under section 3502(1) of title 44, United States Code, other than those considered to be independent regulatory agencies, as defined in section 3502(5) of title 44, United States Code.

(b) “Made in America Laws” means all statutes, regulations, rules, and Executive Orders relating to Federal financial assistance awards or Federal procurement, including those that refer to “Buy America” or “Buy American,” that require, or provide a preference for, the purchase or acquisition of goods, products, or materials produced in the United States, including iron, steel, and manufactured goods offered in the United States. Made in America Laws include laws requiring domestic preference for maritime transport, including the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (Public Law 66–261) [41 Stat. 988], also known as the Jones Act.

(c) “Waiver” means an exception from or waiver of Made in America Laws, or the procedures and conditions used by an agency in granting an exception from or waiver of Made in America Laws.

Sec. 3. Review of Agency Action Inconsistent with Administration Policy. (a) The head of each agency shall, as soon as practicable and as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, including the Administrative Procedure Act [see 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq., 701 et seq.], consider suspending, revising, or rescinding those agency actions that are inconsistent with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

(b) The head of each agency shall, as soon as practicable and as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, including the Administrative Procedure Act, consider proposing any additional agency actions necessary to enforce the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

Sec. 4. Updating and Centralizing the Made in America Waiver Process. (a) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) shall establish within OMB the Made in America Office. The Made in America Office shall be headed by a Director of the Made in America Office (Made in America Director), who shall be appointed by the Director of OMB.

(b) Before an agency grants a waiver, and unless the OMB Director provides otherwise, the agency (granting agency) shall provide the Made in America Director with a description of its proposed waiver and a detailed justification for the use of goods, products, or materials that have not been mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States.

(i) Within 45 days of the date of the appointment of the Made in America Director, and as appropriate thereafter, the Director of OMB, through the Made in America Director, shall:

(1) publish a list of the information that granting agencies shall include when submitting such descriptions of proposed waivers and justifications to the Made in America Director; and

(2) publish a deadline, not to exceed 15 business days, by which the Director of OMB, through the Made in America Director, either will notify the head of the agency that the Director of OMB, through the Made in America Director, has waived each review described in subsection (c) of this section or will notify the head of the agency in writing of the result of the review.

(ii) To the extent permitted by law and consistent with national security and executive branch confidentiality interests, descriptions of proposed waivers and justifications submitted to the Made in America Director by granting agencies shall be made publicly available on the website established pursuant to section 6 of this order.

(c) The Director of OMB, through the Made in America Director, shall review each proposed waiver submitted pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, except where such review has been waived as described in subsection (b)(i)(2) of this section.

(i) If the Director of OMB, through the Made in America Director, determines that issuing the proposed waiver would be consistent with applicable law and the policy set forth in section 1 of this order, the Director of OMB, through the Made in America Director, shall notify the granting agency of that determination in writing.

(ii) If the Director of OMB, through the Made in America Director, determines that issuing the proposed waiver would not be consistent with applicable law or the policy set forth in section 1 of this order, the Director of OMB, through the Made in America Director, shall notify the granting agency of the determination and shall return the proposed waiver to the head of the agency for further consideration, providing the granting agency with a written explanation for the determination.

(1) If the head of the agency disagrees with some or all of the bases for the determination and return, the head of the agency shall so inform the Made in America Director in writing.

(2) To the extent permitted by law, disagreements or conflicts between the Made in America Director and the head of any agency shall be resolved in accordance with procedures that parallel those set forth in section 7 of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993 (Regulatory Planning and Review) [5 U.S.C. 601 note], with respect to the Director of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within OMB.

(d) When a granting agency is obligated by law to act more quickly than the review procedures established in this section allow, the head of the agency shall notify the Made in America Director as soon as possible and, to the extent practicable, comply with the requirements set forth in this section. Nothing in this section shall be construed as displacing agencies’ authorities or responsibilities under law.

Sec. 5. Accounting for Sources of Cost Advantage. To the extent permitted by law, before granting a waiver in the public interest, the relevant granting agency shall assess whether a significant portion of the cost advantage of a foreign-sourced product is the result of the use of dumped steel, iron, or manufactured goods or the use of injuriously subsidized steel, iron, or manufactured goods. The granting agency may consult with the International Trade Administration in making this assessment if the granting agency deems such consultation to be helpful. The granting agency shall integrate any findings from the assessment into its waiver determination as appropriate.

Sec. 6. Promoting Transparency in Federal Procurement. (a) The Administrator of General Services shall develop a public website that shall include information on all proposed waivers and whether those waivers have been granted. The website shall be designed to enable manufacturers and other interested parties to easily identify proposed waivers and whether those waivers have been granted. The website shall also provide publicly available contact information for each granting agency.

(b) The Director of OMB, through the Made in America Director, shall promptly report to the Administrator of General Services all proposed waivers, along with the associated descriptions and justifications discussed in section 4(b) of this order, and whether those waivers have been granted. Not later than 5 days after receiving this information, the Administrator of General Services shall, to the extent permitted by law and consistent with national security and executive branch confidentiality interests, make this information available to the public by posting it on the website established under this section.

Sec. 7. Supplier Scouting. To the extent appropriate and consistent with applicable law, agencies shall partner with the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), discussed in the Manufacturing Extension Partnership Improvement Act (title V of Public Law 114–329) [see 15 U.S.C. 278k], to conduct supplier scouting in order to identify American companies, including small- and medium-sized companies, that are able to produce goods, products, and materials in the United States that meet Federal procurement needs.

Sec. 8. Promoting Enforcement of the Buy American Act of 1933. (a) Within 180 days of the date of this order [Jan. 25, 2021], the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (FAR Council) shall consider proposing for notice and public comment amendments to the applicable provisions in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), title 48, Code of Federal Regulations, consistent with applicable law, that would:

(i) replace the “component test” in Part 25 of the FAR that is used to identify domestic end products and domestic construction materials with a test under which domestic content is measured by the value that is added to the product through U.S.-based production or U.S. job-supporting economic activity;

(ii) increase the numerical threshold for domestic content requirements for end products and construction materials; and

(iii) increase the price preferences for domestic end products and domestic construction materials.

(b) The FAR Council shall consider and evaluate public comments on any regulations proposed pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and shall promptly issue a final rule, if appropriate and consistent with applicable law and the national security interests of the United States.

Sec. 9. Updates to the List of Nonavailable Articles. Before the FAR Council proposes any amendment to the FAR to update the list of domestically nonavailable articles at section 25.104(a) of the FAR, the Director of OMB, through the Administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP), shall review the amendment in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce and the Made in America Director, paying particular attention to economic analyses of relevant markets and available market research, to determine whether there is a reasonable basis to conclude that the article, material, or supply is not mined, produced, or manufactured in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available commercial quantities and of a satisfactory quality. The Director of OMB, through the Administrator of OFPP, shall make these findings available to the FAR Council for consideration.

Sec. 10. Report on Information Technology That Is a Commercial Item. The FAR Council shall promptly review existing constraints on the extension of the requirements in Made in America Laws to information technology that is a commercial item and shall develop recommendations for lifting these constraints to further promote the policy set forth in section 1 of this order, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law.

Sec. 11. Report on Use of Made in America Laws. Within 180 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall submit to the Made in America Director a report on:

(a) the agency’s implementation of, and compliance with, Made in America Laws;

(b) the agency’s ongoing use of any longstanding or nationwide waivers of any Made in America Laws, with a written description of the consistency of such waivers with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order; and

(c) recommendations for how to further effectuate the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

Sec. 12. Bi-Annual Report on Made in America Laws. Bi-annually following the initial submission described in section 11 of this order, the head of each agency shall submit to the Made in America Director a report on:

(a) the agency’s ongoing implementation of, and compliance with, Made in America Laws;

(b) the agency’s analysis of goods, products, materials, and services not subject to Made in America Laws or where requirements of the Made in America Laws have been waived;

(c) the agency’s analysis of spending as a result of waivers issued pursuant to [section 301 of] the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 2511, separated by country of origin; and

(d) recommendations for how to further effectuate the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

Sec. 13. Ensuring Implementation of Administration Policy on Federal Government Property. Within 180 days of the date of this order, the Administrator of General Services shall submit to the Made in America Director recommendations for ensuring that products offered to the general public on Federal property are procured in accordance with the policy set forth in section 1 of this order.

Sec. 14. Revocation of Certain Presidential and Regulatory Actions. (a) Executive Order 13788 of April 18, 2017 (Buy American and Hire American) [formerly set out above], section 5 of Executive Order 13858 of January 31, 2019 (Strengthening Buy-American Preferences for Infrastructure Projects) [set out above], and Executive Order 13975 of January 14, 2021 (Encouraging Buy American Policies for the United States Postal Service) [39 U.S.C. 401 note], are hereby revoked.

(b) Executive Order 10582 of December 17, 1954 (Prescribing Uniform Procedures for Certain Determinations Under the Buy-America Act) [41 U.S.C. 8303 note], and Executive Order 13881 of July 15, 2019 (Maximizing Use of American-Made Goods, Products, and Materials) [set out above], are superseded to the extent that they are inconsistent with this order.

Sec. 15. Severability. If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its other provisions to any other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

Sec. 16. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Ex. Ord. No. 14104. Federal Research and Development in Support of Domestic Manufacturing and United States Jobs

Ex. Ord. No. 14104, July 28, 2023, 88 F.R. 51203, provided:

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy. The United States maintains an unparalleled innovation ecosystem with world-class universities, Federal laboratories, research centers, and technology incubators, supported in part by Federal investment. Our world is healthier, smarter, more connected, and more sustainable because of Federal taxpayers’ investment in discovery and innovation that has supported the commercialization of new products and services.

My Administration has prioritized support for our unique innovation ecosystem by reinvesting across sectors in research and development (R&D), demonstrations, education, and the necessary infrastructure to accelerate the transition of discoveries quickly from the lab to the marketplace.

This investment is designed to produce cutting-edge technologies that support the competitiveness, domestic manufacturing capacity, and well-being of the United States economy; United States workers; our communities; and our national security. Ensuring the commercialization of federally funded inventions by United States manufacturers—while maintaining intellectual property rights—will build on the successful legacy of the United States in spurring economic growth and enhancing United States competitiveness through R&D. It will also further our joint R&D work with partners and allies to strengthen the resilience of global critical supply chains and secure America’s leadership in delivering a net-zero emissions economy by no later than 2050.

Therefore, it is the policy of my Administration that when new technologies and products are developed with support from the United States Government, they will be manufactured in the United States whenever feasible and consistent with applicable law.

Sec. 2. Coordination and Consultation. (a) The Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) shall coordinate the executive branch actions necessary to implement this order through the interagency process identified in National Security Memorandum 2 of February 4, 2021 (Renewing the National Security Council System).

(b) In implementing this order, the heads of executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, consult outside stakeholders—such as those in industry; academia, including Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Tribal Colleges and Universities, and other Minority Serving Institutions; non-governmental organizations; communities; labor unions; and State, local, Tribal, and territorial governments—in order to implement the policy identified in section 1 of this order.

Sec. 3. Strengthening Domestic Manufacturing. (a) The Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Secretary of Transportation, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of the National Science Foundation, and the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration should consider domestic manufacturing in Federal R&D funding agreement solicitations, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law. These agency heads shall also consider how their respective agencies’ R&D funding agreements support broader domestic manufacturing objectives, including the development of production facilities and capabilities broadly supportive of United States manufacturing, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law.

(b) The Director of OSTP, working through the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) and in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget’s Made in America Office (Made in America Director) and the heads of agencies identified in subsection (a) of this section, shall seek to add “domestic manufacturing” to future interagency technology R&D roadmaps, as appropriate. The Director of OSTP shall endeavor to standardize the format of domestic manufacturing considerations in technology R&D roadmaps to ensure that industry, the research community, and agencies create the conditions for new technologies to be produced in the United States once they are commercialized.

(c) In collaboration with the Administrator of the Small Business Administration (SBA), the heads of agencies participating in the Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer programs are encouraged to advance a coordinated interagency approach to innovation and research solicitations with the goals of reducing barriers to program participation, streamlining access to funding opportunities, and encouraging production of new technologies in the United States. The heads of these agencies are further encouraged to collaborate with the SBA to support small businesses transitioning technologies from intramural and extramural labs to commercial markets.

(d) The heads of agencies that have statutory Other Transaction Authority, or that can use other business arrangements authorized by the Congress, are encouraged, when appropriate, to consider using these authorities to purchase or invest in leading-edge technologies to support their production in the United States. If these agencies use these authorities to purchase or invest in the development of new technologies, the terms of these purchases and investments should ensure that the product is substantially manufactured in the United States, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law.

(e) To further support the commercialization and production in the United States of technologies developed, in part, through federally funded R&D, the heads of agencies identified in subsection (a) of this section are encouraged to establish or enhance the technology transfer and commercialization capabilities of their agencies.

Sec. 4. Modernizing Reporting of Invention Utilization. (a) In an effort to streamline reporting requirements for recipients of Federal R&D funding agreements, the heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order should seek to make reporting on the utilization of “subject inventions” (as defined in 35 U.S.C. 201(e)) easier and consistent across the United States Government.

(b) To incentivize domestic manufacturing through the reporting of invention disclosures and the utilization of those inventions, the heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order shall require recipients of Federal R&D funding agreements to track and update the awarding agency on the location in which subject inventions are manufactured.

(c) The heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order should require recipients of Federal R&D funding agreements to report annually to the awarding agency the names of licensees and manufacturing locations of the applicable subject inventions.

(d) Within 60 days of the date of this order [July 28, 2023], the Secretary of Commerce, through the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and in consultation with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), should develop award terms and conditions regarding the reporting requirements in subsections (a) through (c) of this section to be implemented by each awarding agency identified in section 3(a) of this order. Award terms and conditions shall ensure that the reporting of the information specified in subsections (b) and (c) of this section protects business confidential information, consistent with 35 U.S.C. 202(c)(5), while providing increased visibility to taxpayers on the use of Federal R&D funding in support of domestic manufacturing and job creation.

(e) The Secretary of Commerce, through the Director of NIST and in consultation with the Interagency Working Group for Bayh-Dole, shall consider developing an action plan, including resource requirements, to transition all agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order to the iEdison reporting system to track unclassified subject inventions, patents, and related utilization reports by calendar year 2025. The Secretary of Commerce shall submit the action plan to the Director of OMB within 1 year of the date of this order.

(f) Not later than 120 days after issuance of any final regulations implementing the action plan described in subsection (e) of this section, the heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order shall report to the Director of OMB and the Director of OSTP on steps their respective agencies have taken to transition all unclassified reporting to iEdison by the end of calendar year 2025. These reports may include resource needs and timelines for implementation.

(g) Within 180 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce, through the Director of NIST and in consultation with the Interagency Working Group for Bayh-Dole, should develop common invention utilization questions (utilization questions), allowing agencies to add agency-specific questions.

(i) The utilization questions should be used by all agencies by May 1, 2024, for subject inventions that a Federal R&D funding agreement recipient has elected to retain title on or after the date of this order.

(ii) The utilization questions should require information on the locations where subject inventions are produced or are used to produce a product.

(iii) The Secretary of Commerce, through the Director of NIST, and the heads of other agencies should aim to minimize the reporting burden on recipients of Federal R&D funding agreements associated with the utilization questions, in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and applicable OMB guidance.

(h) Within 2 years after the date of this order and annually thereafter, the heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order shall submit reports to the Made in America Director on the utilization of inventions that were developed through their previous R&D funding agreements and reported after the date of this order, including where products embodying a subject invention or produced through the use of a subject invention were manufactured.

Sec. 5. Securing Critical and Emerging Technologies Through Domestic Manufacturing. (a) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order shall consider whether “exceptional circumstances” exist warranting a determination that a restriction of the right to retain title to any subject invention funded by their respective agencies’ R&D funding agreements will better promote the policy and objectives of the Bayh-Dole Act [35 U.S.C. 200 et seq.], as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, including 35 U.S.C. 202(a). Such consideration shall include evaluation of whether “exceptional circumstances” exist to warrant the extension of the requirement to manufacture “substantially in the United States” to recipients of Federal R&D funding agreements, to non-exclusive licensees of subject inventions, and for use or sale of subject inventions outside the United States, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, including 35 U.S.C. 202(a). In considering the issuance of such determinations for these purposes, the heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order shall:

(i) consider measures for technologies important to the United States economy and national security, including critical and emerging technologies such as energy storage, quantum information science, artificial intelligence and machine learning, semiconductors and microelectronics, and advanced manufacturing; and

(ii) consider narrowly tailoring terms related to enhanced United States manufacturing while encouraging technology transfer and commercialization, and allowing small businesses and nonprofit organizations to retain ownership of and commercialize their federally funded subject inventions.

(b) The heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order shall consider whether other measures are needed to promote domestic manufacturing of subject inventions funded by their respective agencies.

Sec. 6. Implementation of this Order. (a) Within 2 years of the date of this order and annually thereafter for 5 years, the heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order shall submit a report on their respective agencies’ implementation of this order to the Director of OMB and the Director of OSTP.

(b) Each report shall include, to the extent possible, a review of this order’s effectiveness in using the R&D funding agreements of the agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order to support domestic manufacturing, United States industrial competitiveness, and job creation.

(c) Each report shall include, to the extent possible, identification of any challenges to implementation of this order or to the effectiveness of this order in accomplishing the policy goals described in section 1 of this order, as well as recommendations to address such challenges.

Sec. 7. Improving the Waiver Process. (a) Under the Bayh-Dole Act, agencies may waive the requirement that certain products embodying the subject invention or produced through the use of the subject invention be “manufactured substantially in the United States” if, as specified in 35 U.S.C. 204, “reasonable but unsuccessful efforts have been made to grant licenses on similar terms to potential licensees that would be likely to manufacture substantially in the United States” or “under the circumstances domestic manufacture is not commercially feasible.”

(b) Every agency should consider developing a process by which the agency may waive the domestic manufacturing requirements for agency-funded technology or technology developed under an agency funding opportunity without a request from a recipient of a Federal R&D funding agreement. As part of its process, an agency should seek concurrence from the Made in America Director to waive the domestic manufacturing requirements, and should set forth specific factors that may support a waiver, including whether the manufacture of the technology outside the United States is in the economic or national security interest of the United States.

(c) The heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order shall ensure that the waiver process for their agency is rigorous, timely, transparent, and consistent, with due regard for all applicable authorities, including Executive Order 14005 of January 25, 2021 (Ensuring the Future Is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers) [set out above], and the Bayh-Dole Act’s requirement that a waiver be available when reasonable but unsuccessful efforts have been made to license to a company that could substantially manufacture in the United States, or when domestic manufacture is not commercially feasible.

(d) The Secretary of Commerce, through the Director of NIST and in consultation with the Interagency Working Group for Bayh-Dole, the NSTC Lab-to-Market Subcommittee, and the Made in America Director, shall provide guidance to agencies on the factors and considerations that should be weighed in determining whether domestic manufacturing is not commercially feasible. Guidance shall be designed to help applicants understand the factors an agency will consider when evaluating a waiver application, and should ensure that a determination of the commercial feasibility of manufacturing abroad is not based on substandard or unacceptable working conditions. Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce, through the Director of NIST, shall make the guidance available for public comment.

(e) Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce, through the Director of NIST and in consultation with the Interagency Working Group for Bayh-Dole, shall develop common waiver application questions for use by all agencies.

(i) The common waiver application questions should include as relevant criteria, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law:

(A) how the waiver will be used;

(B) why it is important that the subject invention be brought to market;

(C) any potential economic and national security impacts of manufacturing the subject invention abroad;

(D) the benefits that will accrue to domestic manufacturing and United States jobs as a result of the subject invention being brought to market;

(E) whether the applicant is proposing an exclusive or non-exclusive license; and

(F) the conditions under which the subject invention would be manufactured abroad, including unionization of workplaces, health and safety standards, labor and wage laws, and environmental impacts.

(ii) Given the need to maintain agency flexibility, the heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order may add questions to the common waiver application questions, but they should do so sparingly and only as needed to accomplish the policy set forth in this order within their respective agencies’ existing authorities.

(f) The heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order shall adopt the common waiver application questions, to the extent consistent with applicable law.

(g) The heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order should acknowledge receipt of waiver applications within 10 business days, to the extent practicable. Once an applicant submits a waiver request application, the reviewing agency should seek to finalize its decision, including negotiations with the applicant as needed, as soon as possible.

(h) Within 270 days of the date of this order, the heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order shall establish agency guidelines for negotiating with waiver applicants to retain as much value or benefit to the United States as possible, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, while considering technical, business, social, environmental, and economic realities. In assessing a waiver’s value to the United States economy, the heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order should consider, as appropriate and in addition to any other relevant factors, potential benefits to domestic manufacturing competitiveness, to United States job creation, and to United States economic and national security.

(i) The heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order should consider limiting waivers to applicants that commit to manufacture in locations that maintain a market economy and for specific agreed-upon purposes.

(ii) The heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order should expect waiver applicants to deliver alternative benefits to the United States as part of an agreement to grant the waiver. Consideration of alternative benefits may include direct or indirect investment in domestic plants and equipment, the creation of high-quality domestic jobs, or further domestic development of the subject invention.

(i) Beginning in fiscal year 2024 and on an annual basis thereafter, the heads of agencies identified in section 3(a) of this order shall provide to the Secretary of Commerce, through the Interagency Working Group for Bayh-Dole, a summary of each waiver application received, approved, and rejected. The summary shall include the terms of any approved waiver and the processing time needed to reach a decision.

(i) The Secretary of Commerce, through the Interagency Working Group for Bayh-Dole, shall publish a periodic summary of the waiver applications in aggregate that describes common reasons for waiver requests, processing times by agency, and recommended policy responses to common challenges.

(ii) Agencies shall ensure that the information submitted for publication to the Secretary of Commerce, through the Interagency Working Group for Bayh-Dole, appropriately protects business confidential and sensitive information provided by waiver applicants as part of their justification for the waiver, consistent with 35 U.S.C. 202(c)(5). However, the names of applicants seeking a waiver and a summary of the benefits the waiver recipients will provide to the United States should be made available to the public, to the extent permitted by law.

Sec. 8. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.