PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 12, 2017
Save Our Communities from Risky Trains Act of 2017
This bill directs the Department of Transportation (DOT) to issue regulations to require enhanced security measures for shipments of security sensitive material.
DOT shall designate a material, or a group or class of material, as security sensitive if it determines that transporting such material in commerce poses a significant risk to national security due to its potential use in an act of terrorism.
Each railroad carrier transporting security sensitive material shall:
compile material route and storage pattern information, and
submit to DOT a written rail transportation route and storage pattern security risk analysis and an alternative route and storage pattern analysis.
Railroad carriers shall use the route and storage pattern that, based on the analyses, best reduces the risk, including consequences, of a terrorist attack on, or derailment of, a shipment of security sensitive material transported through or near an area of concern (i.e., urban areas).
Each railroad carrier shall review once every five years any changes affecting the security movements of such material.
People & committees
Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large] · D–DC
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 Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1687-1688)
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 11, 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.4629 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.4629 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.4629 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.4629 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.