PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Unfavorable Executive Comment Received from DOE.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 25, 1996
National Center for Excellence in Research and Development Act of 1996 - Authorizes appropriations to the Secretary of Energy for FY 1995 and beyond to maintain the operational readiness of the underground nuclear testing facilities and infrastructure of the Nevada Test Site. Establishes within the Department of Energy a national Test and Demonstration Center of Excellence at the Nevada Test Site, Nevada, to implement testing and demonstration activities related to: (1) certain alternative and renewable energy sources, including solar and geothermal energy, as well as natural gas, electricity, and hydrogen as components of a National Alternative-Fueled Vehicles Program; (2) certain changes in the U.S. military as a result of the end of the Cold War, including demilitarization and disarmament activities and the nonmilitary application of military technologies and resources; (3) stewardship of the Federal nuclear stockpile; (4) non-proliferation and counter-proliferation of nuclear weapons; and (5) development of certain environmental technologies, including technologies for remediation of toxic and hazardous chemicals, and activities pertaining to emergency response to hazardous and toxic accidents.
People & committees
Rep. Vucanovich, Barbara F. [R-NV-2] · R–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Unfavorable Executive Comment Received from DOE.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Military Procurement.
Executive Comment Requested from DOE.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Power, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Chairman.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.
Referred to the Committee on National Security, and in addition to the Committees on Science, and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on National Security, and in addition to the Committees on Science, and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on National Security, and in addition to the Committees on Science, and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on National Security, and in addition to the Committees on Science, and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: Aug 21, 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.2899 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.2899 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.2899 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.2899 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.