PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 462.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Oct 6, 2004
Manhattan Project Sites Study Act of 2004 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special resource study of the Manhattan Project sites at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, the Hanford Site in the State of Washington, and the Oak Ridge Laboratory in Tennessee (Project sites), to assess the national significance, suitability, and feasibility of designating such sites as a unit of the National Park System.
Requires the Secretary, in conducting the study, to: (1) consult with interested government officials, representatives of organizations, and members of the public; (2) evaluate, in coordination with the Secretary of Energy, the compatibility of designating a Project site with maintaining the specified goals of the Department of Energy (DOE) and public health and safety; and (3) consider existing DOE research on the Project sites.
Requires the Secretary to report to Congress on such study.
People & committees
Rep. Hastings, Doc [R-WA-4] · R–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 462.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-744.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-744.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3207 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3207 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3207 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3207 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.