PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment and Hazardous Materials.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 29, 2006
Mercury Reclamation Act of 2006 - Amends the Solid Waste Disposal Act to require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in cooperation with the Secretary of Transportation, to: (1) review storage, transportation, tracking and packaging requirements as they pertain to mercury-bearing solid waste; and (2) promulgate regulations governing the tracking, storage, packaging, record keeping, and reporting on the shipments of mercury-bearing waste. Requires such regulations to ensure the ability to track the generation, treatment, and disposal of mercury wastes and require accountability for waste generators and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities to identify and document wastes and comply with treatment and disposal requirements.
Requires the Administrator to promulgate packaging standards to prevent the release of mercury and mercury vapor during the transportation and storage of mercury-bearing wastes. Exempts from the standards wastes generated by households, until such wastes are received by a treatment, storage, or disposal facility.
Provides for enforcement through compliance orders.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires, with certain exemptions, that each person who generates any solid waste which consists of a device that contains mercury integral to its function: (1) take steps to insure that such waste is treated to reclaim the mercury; or (2) transfer such waste to another person who has accepted responsibility for such reclamation. Requires the Administrator to develop a voluntary compliance program to maximize the collection of mercury-containing exempted items.
Requires the Administrator to re-evaluate the 100 kg/month exemption from hazardous waste standards for small quantity generators.
Requires the treatment standards applicable to all hazardous waste containing mercury in concentrations of 260 mg/kg or more to require the recovery of mercury from such waste prior to land disposal using a technology approved by the Administrator. Authorizes the Administrator to: (1) limit the organic content of such waste that may be subjected to mercury recovery technologies; (2) limit the use of such technologies for radioactive wastes; (3) issue variances and exceptions to the required use of such technologies, based on feasibility of mercury recovery; and (4) revise such treatment standards to incorporate the capabilities of the most advanced available mercury recovery technologies.
Authorizes appropriations for mercury programs.
People & committees
Rep. Gutknecht, Gil [R-MN-1] · R–MN
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.
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: Aug 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.6261 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.6261 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.6261 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.6261 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.