PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 14, 2001
Nuclear Waste Terrorist Threat Assessment and Protection Act - Directs the Office of Homeland Security to coordinate the development and implementation of an interagency plan to prepare for and defend against terrorist crimes targeting the Yucca Mountain Project (high-level nuclear waste repository being studied at Yucca Mountain, Nevada).Requires that the plan: (1) include a comprehensive analysis of the safety and vulnerability of the Project to terrorism; (2) address specified types of attacks; (3) give special emphasis to addressing the use of nuclear waste as a radiological weapon, the use of specified technologies, and sabotage or theft of high-level nuclear waste; and (4) include a comprehensive strategy for defending against terrorism and an analysis of the economic, public health, and environmental costs and impacts of implementing the plan.Directs: (1) the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to coordinate the development and implementation of a comprehensive interagency plan; and (2) the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and FEMA to enter into appropriate arrangements with the National Research Council for technical review of the plans and to report to Congress on the potential liability costs and damages resulting from terrorism against the Project.Prohibits the Secretary of Energy from making a positive recommendation regarding, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission from issuing a license for, a Yucca Mountain repository unless specified conditions are met, including that public hearings have been held for affected populations and the Secretary has certified that the Project is not vulnerable to terrorism.
People & committees
Rep. Berkley, Shelley [D-NV-1] · D–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Railroads.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Aviation.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 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.3289 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.3289 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.3289 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.3289 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.