PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 15, 2001
Deadly Biological Agent Control Act of 2001 - Revises Federal criminal code provisions regarding biological weapons to set penalties for: (1) knowingly possessing a select biological agent or toxin (select agent) without obtaining a certification from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA); and (2) any research facility knowingly transferring a select agent to an entity that has not obtained such certification.Amends the AEDPA to direct the Secretary of HHS to: (1) annually review the existing list of select agents and, if necessary, revise the list; (2) prioritize countermeasures, including vaccines, therapies, medical devices, and diagnostic tests which must be developed, produced, or obtained in preparation for a bioterrorist attack or other significant disease emergency to treat, prevent, or identify infection by, or exposure to, listed biological agents and toxins (listed agents); and (3) provide for the establishment and enforcement of standards and procedures governing the possession and use of listed agents.Requires the Secretary to establish a certification process for the possession and use of listed agents. Sets forth legitimate purposes. Requires any individual who handles listed agents to pass a criminal background check, including a determination of whether that individual is a restricted person, and to be registered with the Department of HHS for the specific research project that requires the use of biological agents or toxins.Sets penalties for violations.
People & committees
Rep. Schiff, Adam B. [D-CA-27] · D–CA
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 Health.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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 the Judiciary, 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 the Judiciary, 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.
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.3306 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.3306 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.3306 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.3306 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.