PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Feb 16, 2010
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the Senate on December 23, 2009. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Nuclear Forensics and Attribution Act - Expresses the sense of Congress that the President should: (1) pursue bilateral and multilateral international agreements to establish an international framework for determining the source of any confiscated nuclear or radiological material or weapon, as well as the source of any detonated weapon and the nuclear or radiological material used in such a weapon; (2) develop protocols for the data exchange and dissemination of sensitive information relating to nuclear or radiological materials and samples of controlled nuclear or radiological materials to the extent required by such agreements; and (3) develop expedited protocols for the data exchange and dissemination of sensitive information needed to publicly identify the source of a nuclear detonation.
Amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to include within the mission of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office to: (1) lead the development and implementation of the national strategic five-year plan for improving U.S. nuclear forensic and attribution capabilities required under the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2010; (2) establish within the Office a National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center to provide centralized stewardship, planning, assessment, gap analysis, exercises, improvement, and integration for all federal nuclear forensics and attribution activities; (3) establish a National Nuclear Forensics Expertise Development Program that is devoted to developing and maintaining a vibrant and enduring academic pathway from undergraduate to post-doctorate study in nuclear and geochemical science specialties directly relevant to technical nuclear forensics and that shall provide undergraduate and doctoral student scholarships and awards to ensure that faculty and their graduate students have a sustained funding stream; and (4) report to Congress annually on such activities.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Director of the Office and each of the relevant departments that are partners in the Center to: (1) include, as part of required assessments, evaluations, and reviews, each office's or department's activities and investments in support of nuclear forensics and attribution activities and specific goals and objectives accomplished during the previous year pursuant to the national strategic five-year plan for improving U.S. nuclear forensic and attribution capabilities; (2) attach, as an appendix to the Joint Interagency Annual Review, the most current version of such strategy and plan; and (3) include a description of new or amended bilateral and multilateral agreements and efforts in support of nuclear forensics and attribution activities accomplished during the previous year.
People & committees
Rep. Schiff, Adam B. [D-CA-29] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 111-140.
Became Public Law No: 111-140.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Cleared for White House.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 397 - 10 (Roll no. 16). (text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR 1/20/2010 H226-227)
House roll call 16 · Individual votesResolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 397 - 10 (Roll no. 16).(text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR 1/20/2010 H226-227)
House roll call 16 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H300-301)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 730.
Ms. Clarke moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment. (consideration: CR H226-229)
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S13886-13887; text as passed Senate: S13886-13887)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S13886-13887; text as passed Senate: S13886-13887)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 244.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Reported by Senator Lieberman with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 402 - 16 (Roll no. 148). (text: CR H3765-3766)
House roll call 148 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 402 - 16 (Roll no. 148).(text: CR H3765-3766)
House roll call 148 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3772-3773)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 730.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3765-3769)
Mr. Carney moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Science and Technology.
Referred to House Foreign Affairs
Referred to the Committee on Homeland Security, and in addition to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, 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 House Homeland Security
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: Apr 7, 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.730 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.730 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.730 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.730 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.