Review - HR 3435 Introduced – Federal Cyber Workforce Training

Back in May Rep Fallon (R,TX) introduced HR 3435, the Federal Cyber Workforce Training Act of 2025. The bill would require the National Cyber Director to formulate a plan for the establishment of a federal cyber training institute. It does not authorize the actual establishment of the institute, that would require subsequent legislation. The bill specifically does not authorize new spending.

This bill is essentially the same as to HR 9520 that was introduced by Fallon in September 2024. No other action was taken on HR 9520 in the 118^th Congress.

Moving Forward

Fallon is a member of the House Oversight and Accountability Committee to which this bill was assigned for consideration. This means that there may be sufficient influence to see the bill considered in Committee. With new spending being prohibited, I see nothing in this bill that would engender any organized opposition. I suspect that the bill would receive some level of bipartisan support, perhaps enough that it could be considered under the suspension of the rules process.

Commentary

While the proposed institute is not a cybersecurity institute, all cyber work roles should include some level of cybersecurity responsibilities. I think it would be helpful to delineate a responsibility for the institute to establish a minimum level of cybersecurity training for all cyber personnel. To that end, I would like to suggest the insertion of a new §2(b)(2)(C):

“(C) establish a common skill level cybersecurity curriculum for all entry level positions and a more advanced cybersecurity training program for personnel transitioning to mid-career level positions;”

 

For more details about the provisions of this bill, see my article at CFSN Detailed Analysis - https://patrickcoyle.substack.com/p/hr-3435-introduced-federal-cyber - subscription required.

Review - Bills Introduced – 5-15-25

Yesterday, with both the House and Senate in Washington, there were 101 bills introduced. Of those bills, three may receive additional coverage in this blog:

HR 3435 To require the National Cyber Director to submit to Congress a plan to establish an institute within the Federal Government to serve as a centralized resource and training center for Federal cyber workforce development. Fallon, Pat [Rep.-R-TX-4] 

HR 3447 To require the Secretary of Commerce to issue standards with respect to chip security mechanisms for integrated circuit products, and for other purposes. Huizenga, Bill [Rep.-R-MI-4] 

S 1798 A bill to prescribe standards for autonomous vehicles, and for other purposes. Lummis, Cynthia M. [Sen.-R-WY] 

For more information on these bills, including legislative history for similar bills in the 118th, see my article at CFSN Detailed Analysis - https://patrickcoyle.substack.com/p/bills-introduced-5-15-25 - subscription required.

HR 3435 Introduced – Crude Oil Vapor Pressure

Last month Rep. Lowey (D,NY) introduced HR 3435, a bill that would establish crude oil Reid Vapor pressure standards for the shipment of crude oil by rail. The bill is virtually identical to HR 2379 that was introduced in the 114^th Congress. No action was taken on that earlier bill.

The bill would immediately establish a maximum Reid Vapor Pressure limit of 8.5 psi for all crude oil shipped by rail. The DOT would then be required to establish “establish an appropriate national standard for the maximum volatility of crude oil to be permitted to be shipped by rail” {new 49 USC 20169(b)}. No guidance is provided on what would constitute ‘an appropriate national standard’.

Moving Forward

Lowey is not a member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to which this bill was assigned for consideration, but her co-sponsor {Rep. Garamendi (D,CA)} is. This means that there is a remote chance that the bill could be brought up in Committee. It is highly unlikely that the bill will receive consideration due to oil industry opposition. Since the initial RVP standard set in this bill is the average value reported out of the Bakken oil fields, it would severely reduce oil shipments from those fields (the bills intention).

Commentary

The fact that this bill would rely on the Trump Administration to establish an ‘appropriate national standard’ without providing legislative guidance on that standard provides a clear indication that this is a pro forma introduction with no expectation that the bill will pass into law. Further, the introduction of the bill just before the summer recess (particularly when it is nothing more than a copy of a previously ignored bill) is a clear indication that Lowey and Garamendi produced the bill to ‘show’ their supporters that they are doing something about crude oil shipments.

As I have mentioned in an earlier post the Reid Vapor pressure test required by this bill has a number of technical problems associated with it. There is a good technical article that describes those problems and more effective test for predicting the problems with the rapid rise in pressure due to fire impingement that has led to some of the overpressure situations seen in some Bakken crude oil train wreck.

I would think that most transportation safety people would agree that some sort of reasonable limit on the vapor pressure of crude oil, particularly a standard related to the rate of pressure rise in a fire impingement situation, would help to reduce some of the incidents of explosive fires that we have seen in some crude oil train incidents. Having said that, the Reid Vapor Pressure testing required by this bill is totally inadequate to that task.

Bills Introduced – 07-26-17

Yesterday with both the House and Senate in session there were 58 bills introduced. Of those, nine may be of specific interest to readers of this blog:

HR 3401 To amend chapter 301 of subtitle VI of title 49, United States Code, to update or provide new motor vehicle safety standards for highly automated vehicles, and for other purposes. Rep. Schakowsky, Janice D. [D-IL-9]

HR 3404 To provide for the establishment in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of a Highly Automated Vehicle Advisory Council. Rep. Cardenas, Tony [D-CA-29]

HR 3405 To amend title 49, United States Code, to expand the exemption from the motor vehicle safety standards for testing or evaluation purposes to cover manufacturers of highly automated vehicles and automated driving system components, and for other purposes. Rep. Walters, Mimi [R-CA-45]

HR 3406 To amend section 30113 of title 49, United States Code, to increase the annual number of vehicles that may be exempted for the development of new vehicle safety features, and for other purposes. Rep. Upton, Fred [R-MI-6]

HR 3407 To amend chapter 301 of subtitle VI of title 49, United States Code, to require a cybersecurity plan for highly automated vehicles, and for other purposes. Rep. Kinzinger, Adam [R-IL-16]

HR 3408 To amend section 30113 of title 49, United States Code to establish new exemptions for motor vehicle safety standards, and for other purposes. Rep. Lance, Leonard [R-NJ-7]

HR 3411 To establish in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration an Automated Driving System Cybersecurity Advisory Council to make recommendations regarding cybersecurity for the testing, deployment, and updating of automated driving systems. Rep. Costello, Ryan A. [R-PA-6]

HR 3412 To amend section 30103 of title 49, United States Code, to establish sole authority for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration over the regulation of highly automated vehicles, and for other purposes. Rep. Mullin, Markwayne [R-OK-2]

HR 3435 To prohibit the transportation of certain volatile crude oil by rail. Rep. Lowey, Nita M. [D-NY-17]

This block of ‘highly automated vehicles’ legislation (along with a couple of other bills that I don’t expect to be of specific interest here) all come from members of the Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. It looks like these bills may have arisen out of a mark-up hearing that was held on July 19^th by that Subcommittee. That marked-up bill has not been introduced.

I will be watching these bills for cybersecurity language.

HR 3435 is probably similar to HR 2379 that was introduced by Lowey in the 114^th Congress. No action was taken on that bill.