PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Congressional Research Service
Version 53 · Passed House · Jan 30, 2023
Commercial Remote Sensing Amendment Act of 2023
This bill modifies provisions relating to the licensing of private remote sensing space systems. (Remote sensing refers to the collection of unenhanced data by an instrument in Earth's orbit that can be processed into imagery of surface features of the Earth; private remote sensing space systems refer to remote sensing instruments not owned by the U.S. government.)
The bill decreases from 120 to 60 days the amount of time in which the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration must review and make a determination on an application for a license to operate a private remote sensing space system.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Further, the bill expands annual reporting on the licensing of private remote sensing systems to include a list of all applications, listed by tier, as well as the rationale for each tier categorization (currently, each license is categorized into one of three tiers based on whether the system produces or is capable of producing unenhanced data that is already available from other entities). Additionally, the report must include all terms, conditions, or restrictions placed on licensees.
The bill also extends the requirement for annual reports from September 30, 2020, to September 30, 2030.
People & committees
Rep. Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK-3] · R–OK
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 Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H495)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H495)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 290.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H495-496)
Mr. Lucas moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H495)
Referred to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.
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.290 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.290 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.290 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.290 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.