PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on HELP.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 4, 1999
Radiation Exposure Compensation Improvement Act of 1999 - Amends the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act to add to the definition of "affected area" the parts of Arizona, Utah, and New Mexico comprising the Navajo Nation Reservation that were subjected to fallout from nuclear weapons testing in Nevada. Modifies the definition of "specified disease." Amends provisions regarding claims relating to uranium mining to expand their applicability to include any individual employed to transport or handle uranium ore. Includes as eligible such individuals in currently-specified States and in any other State in which uranium was mined, milled, or transported. Includes as a uranium mine above-ground mines, open pit mines, and uranium mills. Expands the dates between which exposure must have taken place. Increases the amount of compensation provided, decreases the required period of exposure, eliminates the distinction between smokers and nonsmokers, and expands the compensable conditions to include any condition associated with uranium mining, milling, or transport. Mandates compensation for individuals employed in uranium mining, milling, or transport and who: (1) were, without the individual's knowledge or informed consent, intentionally exposed to radiation for research by the Federal Government; or (2) in the course of the individual's employment suffered death, injury, or disability but were barred from the worker's compensation system or civil actions available to similarly situated employees in non-uranium mines or mills. Modifies and establishes various definitions. Changes procedures and requirements regarding the determination and payment of claims, including setting forth certain requirements relating to Native Americans. Declares that payment of an award under any provision of the Act does not preclude an award under any other provision of the Act, but that no individual may receive more than one award for any compensable cancer or other disease. Allows claims to be filed for 20 years after the enactment of this Act and applies the amendments made by this Act to any claim pending or commenced after a specified date. Mandates a report to the Congress that: (1) summarizes medical knowledge on adverse health effects on residents of communities adjacent to uranium mills or mill tailings, above ground uranium mines, or open pit mines; (2) summarizes information on the availability and accessibility of medical care for individuals with malignancies and other compensable diseases relating to exposure to uranium as a result of mining and milling; (3) summarizes reclamation efforts regarding uranium mines, mills, and mill tailings in Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Wyoming, and Utah; and (4) makes recommendations for further actions to ensure health and safety regarding such efforts.
People & committees
Sen. Bingaman, Jeff [D-NM] · D–NM
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on HELP.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1259-1260)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 20, 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 S.367 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 S.367 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 S.367 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 S.367 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.