Comment from Daniel Pitonyak

[200.432, 200.454, 200.461, 200.206, 200.450] To Whom it May Concern: I am an associate professor in nuclear physics. 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. Scientific conferences allow for real-time scrutiny and back-and-forth exchanges. They also create opportunities for informal discussions that can lead to future research projects. Oftentimes the location and dates of conferences are not known at the time of submitting a grant, or smaller workshops may be put together with only a few months notice. Without the ability to attend these activities, the dissemination of results and scientific process that leads to solving important problems will be critically impeded. I have published four papers in the past year in academic journals addressing fundamental features of the strong nuclear force and 3D structure of hadrons. In general, the papers throughout my career have reached researchers in my field across the world and have been widely recognized as contributing significantly to the field of physics. Scientific research is a worldwide endeavor, and collaboration, criticism, discussion, and dissemination of results are crucial to that. This rule would fundamental alter and negatively impact this process and isolate US scientists from the rest of the world, rather than allowing us to be leaders in it.