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 18 · Reported to House amended, Part I · Oct 19, 2017
Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2017
This bill amends the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 to direct the Department of Energy (DOE) to initiate a program to consolidate and temporarily store commercial spent nuclear fuel during the development, construction, and operation of a permanent nuclear waste repository.
The bill addresses federal land withdrawal and related management issues, including the permanent withdrawal of specific federal land for repository use by DOE, updating the Nuclear Regulatory Commission licensing process and conditions for the repository, and limiting activities relating to developing a separate defense waste repository used for storing high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel derived from the atomic energy defense activities of DOE.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
DOE may enter into agreements to provide benefits to state, local, and Tribal governments that might host or be affected by facilities related to storing nuclear waste.
The bill revises the method by which DOE funds its nuclear waste management activities though the collection and usage of the Nuclear Waste Fund.
DOE shall provide in-kind, financial, technical, and other appropriate assistance for safety activities related to the transportation of high-level radioactive waste or spent nuclear fuel.
The bill expresses the sense of Congress that the governments of the United States and Canada should not allow permanent or long-term storage of spent nuclear fuel or other radioactive waste near the Great Lakes.
People & committees
Rep. Shimkus, John [R-IL-15] · 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 passage Passed by recorded vote: 340 - 72 (Roll no. 179).
House roll call 179 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 340 - 72 (Roll no. 179).
House roll call 179 · Individual votesThe House adopted the amendment in the nature of a substitute as agreed to by the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. (text of amendment in the nature of a substitute: CR H3091-3096)
The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House rose from the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union to report H.R. 3053.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 879, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Titus amendment No. 3.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 879, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Schneider amendment No. 2.
DEBATE - Pursuant to the provisions of H. Res. 879, the Committee of the Whole proceeded with 10 minutes of debate on the Keating amendment No. 1.
GENERAL DEBATE - The Committee of the Whole proceeded with one hour of general debate on H.R. 3053.
The Speaker designated the Honorable Keith J. Rothfus to act as Chairman of the Committee.
House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union pursuant to H. Res. 879 and Rule XVIII.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3053. Motion to recommit with or without instructions allowed. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3053 under a structured rule with one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the Chair and Ranking Member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 879. (consideration: CR H3890-3911)
Rule H. Res. 879 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 879 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3053. Motion to recommit with or without instructions allowed. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3053 under a structured rule with one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the Chair and Ranking Member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 259.
Committee on Armed Services discharged.
Committee on Armed Services discharged.
Committee on Natural Resources discharged.
Committee on Natural Resources discharged.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 115-355, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 115-355, Part I.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 49 - 4.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Natural Resources, and Armed Services, 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 Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Natural Resources, and Armed Services, 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 Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Natural Resources, and Armed Services, 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.
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.3053 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.3053 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.3053 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.3053 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.