PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 106-317.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Sep 25, 2000
Amends the Energy Policy Act 1992 with respect to Secretary of Energy reimbursement of licensees for any of the costs of decontamination, decommissioning, reclamation, and other remedial action at an active uranium or thorium processing site which are attributable to byproduct material generated as an incident of sales to the United States. Extends the mandate for such reimbursements through December 31, 2007. Repeals the alternative circumstance that costs be placed into escrow no later than December 31, 2002, and replaces it with the requirement for a plan for subsequent decontamination, decommissioning, reclamation, and other remedial action in the case of costs incurred by a licensee after December 31, 2007.Extends from 2005 to 2008 the dateline by which the Secretary must determine whether certain authorized appropriations exceed amounts reimbursable to licensees.
People & committees
Rep. Cubin, Barbara [R-WY-At Large] · R–WY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-317.
Became Public Law No: 106-317.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S10029)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Received in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S10029)
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 H8277)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H8277)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2641.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8277-8278)
Mrs. Cubin moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 536.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Commerce. H. Rept. 106-886.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Commerce. H. Rept. 106-886.
Subcommittee on Energy and Power Discharged.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1681)
Referred to the House Committee on 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: Apr 7, 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.2641 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.2641 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.2641 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.2641 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.