The National Ccommission of Reform of Federal Criminal Laws found more than 75 different terms in current law used to describe the mental elements of Federal criminal offenses. These terms are typically undefined in the statute in which they are used and may be redundant, conclusory, or contradictory. No general Federal statute conveniently lists or defines the terms. Instead, the Federal courts have taken on the task of interpreting them, which has led to inconsistent and conflicting meanings. Current Federal law also lacks any general statutory rule of construction to be applied in proving the state of mind required for a specific criminal offense or its component elements. S. 1722 replaces the confusing and inconsistent ad hoc approach to culpability that now characterizes Federal criminal law with a new system that has its genesis in the Model Penal Code, the recommendations of the national commission, and recent State codification. The bill reduces the number of terms used to describe culpable states of mind to four: 'intentional,' 'knowing,' 'reckless,' and 'negligent.' Further, S.1722 follows the Model Penal Code's recommendation that culpability terms should also describe the culpability required with respect to the circumstances associated with the conduct or any required result of such conduct. This approach sacrifices some of the seeming simplicity of current law, but permits greater flexibility, uniformity, and accuracy by tailoring the four defined culpability terms to the different components of a criminal offense. Case notes are included.