PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 22, 1993
Defense Alternative Use Committee Act - Directs the head of each defense agency to require each contractor, as a condition of each defense contract for the provision of defense materials or services, to agree to establish an alternative use committee (committee) at each defense facility used under the contract that employs at least 100 employees. Requires the head of each Government defense facility to establish a committee of at least eight members, with equal representation between management and employees, to undertake economic conversion planning and preparation for the employment of its employees and utilization of its equipment and facilities in the event of a reduction or closure of such facility or the curtailment, conclusion, or disapproval of any defense contract. Provides for: (1) the appointment of community representatives to the committees; (2) prohibitions against discrimination against representatives of unorganized labor on such committees; and (3) funds for committee activities. Requires each committee to evaluate the assets of its facility and develop and review at least biennially a plan for the conversion of such facility to nondefense-related productive activity, to arrange for employee retraining and reemployment, and to dissolve itself after final defense facility conversion.
People & committees
Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-8] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Research and Technology.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Postsecondary Education and Training.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Labor-Management Relations.
Referred to the Subcommittee on International Security, International Organizations and Human Rights.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Space.
Executive Comment Requested from DOT.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Navigation.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E3107-3108)
Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology.
Referred to the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.
Referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.
Referred to the House Committee on Armed Services.
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: Mar 23, 2026. 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.3675 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.3675 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.3675 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.3675 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.