PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 451.
Congressional Research Service
Version 80 · Reported to Senate without amendment · Oct 26, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Methamphetamine Remediation Research Act of 2007 - Directs the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), not later than one year after the enactment of this Act, to: (1) establish voluntary guidelines, based on the best currently available scientific knowledge, for the remediation of former methampehtamine laboratories, including guidelines regarding preliminary site assessment and the remediation of residual contaminants; (2) consider relevant federal, state, and local requirements in developing the guidelines, the varying types and locations of former methamphetamine laboratories, and the cost of carrying out such guidelines; (3) work with state and local governments and other relevant non-federal agencies in adopting the voluntary guidelines; (4) periodically update such guidelines; and (5) establish a research program to support the development and revision of such guidelines.
Directs the Administrator: (1) not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act and every third year thereafter, to convene a conference of appropriate state agencies, individuals, and organizations involved in research and other activities directly relating to the environmental or biological impact of former methamphetamine laboratories; (2) to submit a report to Congress that summarizes the proceedings of the conference, including a summary of recommendations and concerns of non-federal participants; and (3) to make such report widely available to the general public.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Administrator to enter into an arrangement with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) for a study of the status and quality of research on the residual effects of methamphetanmine laboratories and to report to Congress on the uses of such study.
Requires the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology to support a research program to develop: (1) new methamphetamine detection technologies, with an emphasis on field test kits and site detection; and (2) appropriate standard reference materials and validation procedures for methamphetamine detection testing.
Authorizes appropriations for FY2007-FY2008.
People & committees
Sen. Baucus, Max [D-MT] · D–MT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 451.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Boxer without amendment. With written report No. 110-207.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Boxer without amendment. With written report No. 110-207.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.635 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.635 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.635 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.635 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.