PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 2, 1994
Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposal Assurance Act - Amends the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 to declare that the obligation of the Secretary of Energy to accept high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel as of January 31, 1998, is absolute and is not dependent upon either commencement of repository operations or a monitored retrievable storage facility. Prohibits such obligation from being voided or delayed for any reason. Repeals: (1) the prohibition against selection of a monitored retrievable storage site until the Secretary has submitted recommendations for a spent nuclear fuel repository site; and (2) the licensing conditions for a monitored retrievable storage facility.
People & committees
Rep. Grams, Rod [R-MN-6] · R–MN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1626)
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 26, 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.4887 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.4887 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.4887 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.4887 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.