This bill would direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to conduct a terrorism exercise focused on an extreme cold weather event, such as a polar vortex, and how that kind of crisis could trigger cascading failures in critical infrastructure. The exercise would test coordination among federal, state, local, Tribal, territorial, private-sector, and community partners, with attention to keeping access to critical services. Within 60 days after the exercise, DHS would have to send Congress an after-action report with initial findings, lessons learned, and any proposed legislative changes.
What This Bill Does
- Directs DHS to run a terrorism exercise tied to an extreme cold weather event, such as a polar vortex.
- The exercise must address cascading effects on critical infrastructure.
- The scenario must cover how emergency managers and state officials could mitigate the impact of a successful attack.
- DHS must coordinate with federal, state, local, Tribal, territorial, private-sector, and community stakeholders.
- Within 60 days of the exercise, DHS must send Congress an after-action report with findings and proposed legislative changes.
Who This Bill Affects
For most people, this bill would not change daily life directly, but it could improve how DHS and emergency partners respond if a terrorist attack occurred during extreme cold. If you live in a northern state or depend on systems that can fail in severe winter weather—like electricity, heating, transportation, or emergency services—the main benefit is better planning for cascading outages and service disruptions. The bill does not provide payments, eligibility changes, or new benefits to individuals; its effect is through preparedness and coordination.
See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysisWho Supports & Opposes This
- Emergency management officials They may support the bill because it forces a realistic interagency drill for a winter terrorism scenario that could overwhelm local response capacity. Planning for cascading failures ahead of time can reveal gaps in communications, sheltering, and continuity of essential services.
- Critical infrastructure operators Utilities, transportation operators, and other infrastructure stakeholders may favor clearer coordination protocols with DHS and government partners. A structured exercise can clarify who does what when one disruption spreads to others during extreme cold.
- Northern and cold-climate communities Residents and local leaders in colder regions may back the bill because polar-vortex conditions can magnify the effects of an attack on power, heating, and access to care. Better preparedness could reduce the chance that a single event cuts off critical services for extended periods.
- Fiscal conservatives They may object that the bill adds another federally directed exercise and reporting requirement without directly paying for hardening infrastructure or expanding response capacity. From their perspective, it risks producing paperwork rather than measurable improvements on the ground.
- Small local emergency agencies Some local responders may worry about the administrative burden of participating in another DHS exercise and after-action process. Smaller jurisdictions with limited staff can struggle to devote time to planning and reporting without additional resources.
- Privacy and security advocates They may be cautious about broad coordination around critical infrastructure scenarios because it can involve sensitive operational details. Even with classified information protections, they may worry about how much operational vulnerability is exposed in the exercise and subsequent reporting.
Key Implications
-
““develop and conduct a collective response to terrorism exercise””
DHS would be required to stage a formal exercise rather than simply issuing guidance. That means preparedness planning would have to be tested in practice, which can expose real coordination problems before an actual emergency.
-
““An extreme cold weather event, such as an event caused by a polar vortex””
The bill focuses on winter conditions that can quickly intensify infrastructure failures. It is aimed at scenarios where cold itself worsens the damage from an attack or makes recovery harder.
-
““management of cascading effects on critical infrastructure””
This targets chain reactions, not just a single damaged facility. For example, an outage in one sector could affect heating, communications, transportation, or emergency services, so planners would need to think across systems.
-
““coordination with appropriate private sector and community stakeholders””
Private operators and community groups would be part of the planning process, not just federal agencies. That matters because many critical systems are run by nonfederal entities and local response often depends on them.
-
““submit … an after-action report””
Congress would receive a written review of what DHS learned and what it plans to change. The report could shape future DHS operations or prompt additional legislation, but it does not by itself create new funding or mandates.
Official Source & Bill Facts
BillBoard checks this page against public Congress.gov metadata, then adds plain-English analysis where available.
- Bill
- HR 3106
- Congress
- 119th Congress
- Official title
- Weatherizing Infrastructure in the North and Terrorism Emergency Readiness Act of 2025
- Policy area
- Defense & Military
- Latest action
- Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 30 - 0. (June 24, 2026)
- Last updated
- June 25, 2026
Latest Status
June 24, 2026
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 30 - 0.
Related Bills
Take Action
Get more from BillBoard
Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.
Ask AI about this billData sourced from api.congress.gov.