Comment from Douglas Kelley

[200.432, 200.454, 200.461, 200.206, 200.450] To Whom it May Concern: I am a full professor of mechanical engineering. I am writing in my personal capacity to oppose the proposed revisions to sections 200.432, 200.454, 200.461, 200.206, and 200.450 that would restrict typical professional expenses, curtail the communication of scientific results, and place excessive scrutiny on the activities of scientists. American scientific research has made our country rich and secure. But discoveries can have no impact if they are not communicated, and insights are rarely formed without discussion with other researchers in the field. Professional societies are essential for enabling scientific communication and discovery. Conferences are where scientific ideas are refined best, through rapid and direct debate. At conferences, junior researchers -- who comprise our country's future scientists -- learn to present their ideas and critique others'. Flexibility in attending conferences is essential because many conferences aren't planned years ahead and because a scientist's attendance at conferences depends on the progress of the scientific work, which is difficult to predict. Without access to the scientific record, a person cannot determine the state of a research field, identify open questions, or know how their own hypotheses could affect others' work. Scientific research is simply impossible without access to the scientific record. In the last five years, I have published 38 peer-reviewed journal articles which helped get me promoted to full professor, enabled millions of dollars of grants, and significantly advanced human understanding of how the brain clears disease-causing metabolic waste, how liquid metal batteries could better store energy, and how aluminum could be manufactured more efficiently. Without frequent exchanges via conferences and scientific publication, researchers cannot effectively make discoveries. Throttling these activities would stifle American innovation.