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, 2007
Directs the Secretary of Energy to contract with the operator of the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Facility for the transfer from the Department of Energy's enrichment facility at Piketon, Ohio, to the Paducah facility of cylinders of uranium tailings with an assay of such value as the Secretary finds economically suitable for re-enrichment.
Requires such contract to provide for re-enrichment at the Paducah facility of the materials in the cylinders and in similar cylinders of comparable value.
Requires the Secretary to sell or contract for the sale of the product of such re-enrichment, whose net proceeds shall be deposited into the Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund (UEDD Fund) and disbursed by appropriation for environmental remediation at the Paducah, Kentucky, and Portsmouth, Ohio, uranium enrichment facilities.
Amends the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to reauthorize the UEDD Fund for an additional three years.
People & committees
Rep. Whitfield, Ed [R-KY-1] · R–KY
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 House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
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: Jan 15, 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.4189 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.4189 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.4189 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.4189 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.