PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 2, 2017
Nuclear Utilization of Keynote Energy Act
This bill revises the functions of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) by establishing new transparency and accountability measures on the commission's budget and fee structure and developing the regulatory framework necessary to enable the licensing of advanced nuclear reactors.
The bill amends the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 to remove amounts appropriated for the Advanced Reactor Program from the NRC's fee recovery requirement. The NRC must ensure that the collection of fees is equal to its budget authority. The NRC may collect fees through: (1) fees for services that specifically benefit a particular person or entity, and (2) annual fees to fund regulatory costs. The bill places a cap on the amount of the annual fee that may be charged to an operating reactor, which the NRC may waive if the cap compromises its safety and security mission.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The Government Accountability Office must study and report on: (1) the feasibility and implications of repealing restrictions on issuing licenses for certain nuclear facilities to an alien or foreign entity, and (2) the impact of the elimination of mandatory hearings for uncontested licensing and construction permit applications under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
The NRC must: (1) follow specified procedures when reviewing an application for an early site permit, construction permit, operating license, or combined construction permit and operating license for a nuclear production or utilization facility; and (2) initiate a rulemaking proceeding to address the regulatory framework for decommissioning nuclear reactors.
People & committees
Rep. Kinzinger, Adam [R-IL-16] · R–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
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 H8789-8791)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H8789-8791)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1320.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8789-8792)
Mr. Olson moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 717.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 115-924.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 115-924.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
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 H.R.1320 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.1320 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.1320 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.1320 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.