PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 22, 2004
Methamphetamine Remediation Act of 2004 - Directs the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish a research program to: (1) identify methamphetamine laboratory-related chemicals of concern; and (2) support the development of standards to determine when a former methamphetamine laboratory is safe for human habitation.
Requires the EPA, in consultation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), to establish model guidelines and procedures for: (1) preliminary site assessment criteria for former methamphetamine laboratories; and (2) clean-up and remediation.
Requires NIST to support a research program to develop: (1) new methamphetamine detection technologies; and (2) appropriate standard reference materials and validation procedures for methamphetamine detection testing.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) to make available to the public a list of all methamphetamine laboratories that have undergone cleanup under the DEA's Clandestine Drug Laboratory Cleanup Program.
Requires the EPA to enter into an arrangement with the National Academy of Sciences (Academy) for a study of the residual effects of methamphetamine laboratories on residents of buildings where such laboratories are located, with particular emphasis on the health effects on children.
Requires the NSF to enter into an arrangement with the Academy for a report on the societal costs of methamphetamine production and abuse.
People & committees
Rep. Gordon, Bart [D-TN-6] · D–TN
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 Environment and Hazardous Materials, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards.
Referred to the Committee on Science, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 Science, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 Science, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 18, 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.4636 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.4636 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.4636 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.4636 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.