PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · May 13, 2024
This bill limits the importation of uranium from Russia.
Specifically, it bans unirradiated low-enriched uranium (i.e., uranium that has not been in a reactor) that is produced in Russia or by a Russian entity from being imported into the United States. The bill also prohibits the importation of unirradiated low-enriched uranium that has been swapped for the banned uranium or otherwise obtained in a manner designed to circumvent the ban's restrictions.
However, the Department of Energy (DOE) may waive this ban if DOE determines that (1) no alternative viable source of low-enriched uranium is available to sustain the continued operation of a nuclear reactor or a U.S. nuclear energy company, or (2) importation of the uranium is in the national interest. Any waiver issued must terminate by January 1, 2028. The ban terminates on December 31, 2040.
People & committees
Rep. McMorris Rodgers, Cathy [R-WA-5] · R–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 118-62.
Became Public Law No: 118-62.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S3084)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S3084)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H6760-6761)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H6760-6761)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1042.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6760-6762)
Mrs. Rodgers (WA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 240.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 118-296.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 118-296.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 29 - 21.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 18 - 12 .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy, Climate and Grid Security.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 6, 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 H.R.1042 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 H.R.1042 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 H.R.1042 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 H.R.1042 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.