America’s Living Library Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Young, Todd [R-IN]
- Committees
- Energy and Natural Resources Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 16, 2026
Bottom line
The bill creates a comprehensive federal program to map the genomic data of species within National Parks, aiming to advance biodiversity research and conservation while implementing robust data security and national interest safeguards.
What it actually does
This bill establishes the "America's Living Library Project" within the United States Geological Survey (USGS) to collect, catalog, and whole-genome sequence samples from animals, plants, fungi, and microbes found in units of the National Park System. It mandates the creation of a publicly available genomic database, sets strict data and biosafety standards, and includes provisions to prevent foreign entities of concern from accessing certain expedited data pathways for artificial intelligence development.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue the project will significantly enhance scientific understanding of biodiversity, aid conservation efforts for high-priority species, and provide a valuable public resource for research and education. They emphasize the importance of genomic data for ecological resilience, adaptation to environmental changes, and maintaining U.S. leadership in biotechnology, particularly with the safeguards against foreign entities of concern.
Opponents contend
Potential opponents might raise concerns about the overall cost of the program, the administrative burden on federal agencies, or the feasibility of long-term data management and storage. Some could argue that the strict limitations on data sharing, particularly with international partners, might hinder global scientific collaboration or that the focus on National Park System units is too narrow.
The bill is moderately complex due to its technical definitions, interagency coordination requirements, and detailed data/biosafety protocols, requiring careful reading. However, its length makes it manageable for an informed reader to review within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 2(b)
Establishment of America's Living Library Project
This provision formally establishes a pilot program called the "America's Living Library Project" under the authority of the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the United States Geological Survey. This sets the foundation for all subsequent activities outlined in the bill, designating the lead agency for the initiative.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that formally establishing the project provides the necessary legal framework and institutional home within the USGS, a scientific agency well-suited to lead such an endeavor.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against the establishment of a program itself, but rather to its scope, cost, or specific operational details.
Tradeoffs
The establishment of a new program represents a commitment of federal resources to a specific scientific area, potentially diverting focus or funding from other initiatives if not adequately resourced.
Section 2(d)
Interagency Coordination and Public Genomic Database
This section mandates extensive coordination among federal agencies, including the National Park Service, USDA, Smithsonian, and NIH, for collecting, cataloging, and whole-genome sequencing of species samples from National Park System units. It requires the creation of a publicly available genomic database, which will integrate existing taxonomic systems, but will withhold sensitive collection locality information and personally identifiable data to protect resources and personnel.
Section 2(e)
Program Office within USGS and Operational Authority
This section directs the Secretary to establish or designate an office within the USGS to administer the America's Living Library Project. This office is granted broad authority to carry out the program, including entering into contracts, leases, and cooperative agreements with federal agencies or public/private entities. It also allows the office to receive in-kind contributions from biotechnology companies, subject to strict vetting for conflicts of interest.
Section 2(f)
Phased Selection of National Park System Units
This provision outlines a phased approach for selecting National Park System units where the program will operate. Within 180 days of enactment, 5 units must be selected, followed by an additional 20 units within two years. Selections are based on objective criteria including biological landscape, implementation feasibility, educational opportunities, research value, and geographic/ecological diversity. Public notice of these selections and the rationale behind them is required.
Section 2(g)(1)
Data Standards and Cybersecurity Safeguards
This provision mandates that the program leverage existing and emerging data standards to ensure high-quality, usable, and interoperable genomic data, complete with appropriate metadata. It requires compliance with federal biological data standards (or program-specific standards if none exist), Department policies for endangered/threatened species, and USGS standards. Crucially, it demands robust cybersecurity and access safeguards, including adherence to National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) special publications 800-53 and 800-111, to protect generated and stored genomic data.
Section 2(g)(2)
Long-term Sample Storage and Biosafety Protocols
This provision details the requirements for the long-term storage of collected samples, mandating consultation with the USDA and Smithsonian. It specifies that sample ownership remains with the program but allows housing with the Smithsonian (natural history collections) and USDA (germplasm repository). Before collection, species must be evaluated for long-term storage and high-priority status, and rigorously assessed for disease vectors or harmful biological agents. Any microbial or pathogen material identified requires separate, access-controlled storage in facilities with appropriate containment. Crucially, physical samples cannot be transferred, exported, or loaned outside the United States, and all physical storage and processing must occur domestically.
Section 2(i)(3)
Expedited AI Model Access for Qualified U.S. Entities
This provision requires the program's implementation plan to include pathways for expedited, non-public access to genomic data (including bulk export APIs and computer resources) specifically for the development, training, or evaluation of artificial intelligence models. This access is strictly limited to entities organized under the laws of the United States that are not owned or controlled, directly or indirectly, by any 'foreign entity of concern' (a term defined by cross-reference to another federal law).
The bill defines "foreign entity of concern" by referencing section 40207 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (42 U.S.C. 18741). This external reference dictates which entities are restricted from certain expedited AI data access pathways.
Section 2(a)(3)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to ensure consistency and avoid redundancy by referencing existing statutory definitions, rather than re-stating complex legal language.
Case for: Ensures that the national security protections in this bill align with established federal policy regarding foreign entities, providing a clear and consistent legal framework.
Case against: Requires external research to fully grasp the extent of the restrictions, potentially making the bill less immediately transparent to a casual reader.
Estimated impact: This definition directly impacts the eligibility of numerous domestic and foreign-owned entities for expedited access to genomic data for AI development, potentially affecting billions in research and development.
The term "control" is broadly defined to mean having the ability, directly or indirectly, to determine an entity's activities through ownership, authority over assets, position as a director/officer/partner, or contractual arrangement. This definition is crucial for determining if an entity is a "foreign entity of concern" or if in-kind contributions are subject to conflict of interest vetting.
Section 2(a)(1)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to provide precise legal meaning for terms used throughout the bill, ensuring consistent interpretation and preventing circumvention.
Case for: Provides a comprehensive and robust definition of control, making it difficult for foreign entities to bypass restrictions through complex corporate structures or indirect influence.
Case against: Could be seen as overly broad, potentially capturing legitimate business arrangements or partnerships that are not intended to pose a national security risk.
Estimated impact: This definition underpins the effectiveness of the restrictions on foreign entities of concern, impacting the eligibility of potentially thousands of companies and organizations for program participation or data access.
The publicly available genomic database established by the program is explicitly required to withhold from public release any personally identifiable information and any sensitive collection locality information, including precise collection site locations or coordinates, as determined appropriate by the Secretary to protect personnel, specimens, and resources.
Section 2(d)(1)(B)
Why it matters:This is a common legislative technique to include protective caveats within general authorizations, ensuring that the primary goal (public database) is balanced with necessary safeguards.
Case for: Protects vulnerable species from poaching or disturbance, safeguards sensitive research sites, and ensures the safety of personnel involved in data collection, while still making the genomic data widely available.
Case against: Could limit the utility of the data for some ecological research that relies on precise geographical coordinates for spatial analysis, potentially requiring researchers to seek special access for more granular information.
Estimated impact: Affects the granularity of location data for all samples in the public database, impacting how researchers can use the data for spatial ecology and conservation planning.