HR-10115-119
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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.
Sponsored by James Moylan (R-GU)
What it does
This bill would expand eligibility under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act to more geographic areas (including Guam, Colorado, Montana, and additional Missouri, Washington, Illinois, and Ohio ZIP codes), add new categories of eligible claimants (including B-52 crash response workers at Palomares and Thule, and Enewetak Atoll cleanup workers), raise compensation amounts (from $100,000/$50,000/$25,000 to $150,000 plus separate medical benefit reimbursement), extend the compensation fund and filing deadline from 2028 to 2043, allow previously compensated claimants to seek additional payments under the new terms, ease evidentiary rules by allowing sworn affidavits, and create a process for the President to designate new classes of eligible claimants. It also requires federal studies on radiation impacts in the Northern Mariana Islands and on the health of claimants' descendants, and appropriates funding for radiation exposure screening clinics through 2041.
Who benefits
Downwinders, uranium workers, and their survivors in newly covered areas (Guam, Colorado, Montana, parts of Missouri, Washington, Illinois, and Ohio); veterans and civilian responders involved in the Palomares and Thule nuclear weapons accidents; Enewetak Atoll cleanup workers; previously compensated claimants who can now seek higher payments; descendants of exposed individuals who would benefit from new health studies and screening clinics; and healthcare providers operating radiation screening clinics in the affected states and territories.
Who is hurt
Federal taxpayers who would bear the cost of expanded and retroactive compensation payments, extended fund authorization, and new appropriations for studies and clinics. Claimants in geographic areas not added to the covered list may continue to face difficulty proving eligibility, and the Department of Justice would bear increased administrative burden processing expanded and reopened claims.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that decades of scientific evidence show radiation exposure from atmospheric testing and Manhattan Project waste reached communities never covered by the original 1990 law, and that inflation has eroded the value of compensation caps set decades ago. They contend that easing evidentiary burdens through sworn affidavits and allowing reopened claims for previously compensated individuals corrects longstanding injustices for aging survivors who often lack contemporaneous documentation of decades-old exposure.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that expanding eligibility criteria, raising compensation amounts, and allowing previously paid claimants to reopen claims could substantially increase federal costs beyond initial projections, particularly given the 15-year fund extension and open-ended presidential authority to designate new claimant classes. They contend that relying on third-party affidavits without corroborating documentation risks fraudulent or mistaken claims that dilute resources meant for verified victims.
Constitutional context
This bill operates under Congress's spending power (Art. I, §8, cl. 1) to establish a compensation program, and it delegates limited discretionary authority to the President and Attorney General to designate new claimant classes, raising standard nondelegation considerations under Article I, Section 1, though the delegation is narrow and procedurally bounded rather than of the sweeping kind addressed in West Virginia v. EPA.
Checks and balances
Congress authorizes and funds the program while delegating claims administration to the Attorney General and class-designation authority to the President, with congressional reporting requirements serving as an oversight check.
Historical precedent
The original Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 1990 has been reauthorized and expanded multiple times, including a 2022 extension and a 2025 reauthorization (Public Law 119-21), establishing a clear pattern of periodic congressional expansion of this compensation program.